Six things we learned on day two of phone-hacking trial

The Duke of Sussex has been subjected to a second day of intense cross-examination at the High Court as part of his hacking case against the Daily Mirror publisher.

Giving evidence in the landmark civil case against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over alleged unlawful information gathering, Prince Harry said he found certain headlines “mean” and said he would feel “some injustice” if the judge finds his phone was not hacked.

Becoming the first senior royal to be cross-examined in court in more than a century, Harry is suing MGN for damages.

The Duke claims journalists at the publisher’s titles, including the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People, were linked to methods including phone hacking, so-called “blagging” or gaining information by deception, and use of private investigators for unlawful activities.

He alleges 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 by MGN titles contained information gathered using unlawful methods. Of them, 33 have been selected to be considered at the trial.

MGN denies any unlawful activity in this case, claiming its articles came from a range of legitimate sources such as other royals, members of the Royal Household and freelance journalists.

Here is what we have learned from Prince Harry’s second day in the witness box:

On Meghan and bringing legal action

Harry told the court that early conversations with his lawyers when considering the case against MGN were focussed on protecting his wife Meghan from “abuse and intrusion”.

He made clear the distance between himself and the rest of the Royal Family, when asked by the Mirror‘s lawyer, Andrew Green KC, about first approaching solicitors.

The Duke told the court that he was “never shown” any articles about himself by Buckingham Palace and added that even if he had been shown, he “would not have been allowed” to make a complaint.

Harry added that he wanted to “find a way to stop the abuse, intrusion and hate that was coming against me and my wife… without relying on the institution’s lawyers.”

On public interest

On Wednesday, Prince Harry was challenged by Mr Green about what sort of story about him would be in the public interest, to which the royal replied “a life-threatening injury”.

“I’m sure there are others,” he added.

The comment was made during cross-examination over an article published in the Sunday People in May 2005 about Harry having a knee injury and fellow cadets at Sandhurst complaining he was given “preferential treatment” by being let off “gruelling marches”.

The Duke said he did not accept that there was a degree of public interest in the story.

On potentially losing the case

In a rather tense exchange in court room 15, Mr Green asked Harry if he would feel relieved or disappointment if the court found he had not been a victim of phone hacking by MGN journalists.

Prince Harry said giving an answer would be speculating. When pushed, he said that given the “industrial scale” phone hacking going on at the time, he would feel some “injustice”.

“I believe that phone hacking was [done] on an industrial scale across at least three of the papers at the time… that is beyond any doubt,” Harry told the court.

“To have a decision against me and any of the other people [bringing a claim], given that Mirror Group have admitted hacking, yes it would feel like an injustice… if it wasn’t accepted.”

Pressing the Duke further on the issue, Mr Green asked if he wants to have been phone hacked.

Harry replied: “No-one wants to have been phone hacked.”

On relationship with Chelsy Davy

Prince Harry poured doubt on journalists’ use of “palace sources” in stories about his relationship with former girlfriend Chelsey Davy, saying he never would have discussed such information with the Palace.

Discussing an article headlined “Davy Stated”, about alleged rows between the pair, Harry said the information in the article could not have come from the Palace and could have been obtained unlawfully.

Related Article

He said the “whole article itself is suspicious”, adding: “I never discussed with the Palace any details of my relationship with my girlfriend”.

The Duke suggested the palace source quoted in the story either did not exist or would not hold such information.

Mr Green asked Harry if he was alleging that information in the story came from phone hacking.

“Yes,” Harry said, adding: “I say that everything that has been attributed to a Palace source… was obtained unlawfully.”

He added: “The Palace wouldn’t know this information.”

On ‘mean’ headlines

Giving some insight into how he felt reading articles about the demise of his relationship with Ms Davy, Harry said he found some headlines “hurtful” and “mean”.

His comments were about a November 2007 Sunday Mirror article entitled “Hooray Harry’s dumped”.

The Duke said the article headline “does seem to suggest that people are celebrating”, adding it “is a little bit mean”.

He later said: “‘Hooray Harry’s dumped’ was hurtful to say the least, that such a private moment was turned into a bit of a laugh.”

Mr Green said of the article: “It’s not celebrating the demise of the relationship.”

On losing friends

In his 55-page witness statement, released on Tuesday as he first gave evidence, Prince Harry said information about his life reported in the press made him distrustful of friends.

On Wednesday, he pointed to the example of photographs taken of him and late TV presenter Caroline Flack outside the home of his friend Mark Dyer.

Harry said: “Given the fact only the three of us knew the plan, I was highly suspicious and convinced someone had leaked the information to the press.

“I was angry. I hadn’t told anybody. I obviously doubted Caroline, but I even came to distrust Marko.

“My brother and I stopped talking to him for a while as we just couldn’t understand how stories about us meeting privately with him ended up in the papers, or how photographers would end up outside his apartment.

“I now believe this information had come from our voicemails – mine, Marko’s or Caroline’s. The impact these kinds of stories had on my relationships cannot be underestimated. Even those I trusted the most, I ended up doubting.”