I think it should make Hazno wrong though. Its too late, these events happened far too long ago, the world has moved on, and privacy laws have changed. And the case the Mirror agree was illegal, isnt part of this package of articles for this case.
In my opinion, Harrys action is wrong, is because like the Leveson enquiry, its too complicated to unpick cleanly. The world is absolutely full of deceitful and disgraceful events. History is full of deceitful and disgraceful events. But everyone has their own opinion and their own view of a lot of these events. By bringing this case, Harold is breaching the privacy of not just himself, but also of other family members and Chelsea etc. Which surely in itself brings in other problems and issues. Does Chelsea want or need this kind of intrusion now?
How do you unpick this kind of mess of snakes in a way that anyone is going to end up happy? In the court of public opinion Harold is ripping himself to shreds, even if he gets some kind of shallow victory, no one is going to take him seriously,
I completely agree that there are times that things do need to be held to account. such as the press and media invading anyones privacy. and the difference of opinon between public interest and the interest of the public. But we also need a free press, and to do this we need to open ourselves up to .....unsavoury and shady stories.
I am sure someone like Ronald Reagan thought that the Watergate scandal was completely illegal investigative journalism. Boris Johnson and Trump, also seem to want to pick and chose which stories are written about them. Who is right? Who is wrong? Who is the person to establish which stories should be written and which ones shouldnt?
Sadly I think we have probably already gone past the pandoras box period of privacy of personal information and stories. The EU tried to bring in the EHIP or whatever its called, but virtually no one uses it on social media. So however virtuous people want to sound... its not happening. In the Rebecca Vardy case, did she show any remorse or distress that she had exposed and sold her friends stories ? I didnt see any!
Harold is a victim of press intrusion, yes.....but..... to some extent some of this is the fault of those around him.... and not addressing or coping with his paranoia better.
Chelsy's privacy was allready invaded-by the press.
She probably doesn't disagree with this, or someone (her lawyers) would have intervened.
Freedom of the press.
Twatter users, theorists, conspiraloons and all the others (including us here) should be able to write, say, claim, hate, worship, mock, photoshop ...however they want.
Freedom of the press is not tacking the SM things as above and making them ''facts'' (because they are in the MSM)for profit, without evidence, and without consequence.
'' Who is wrong? Who is the person to establish which stories should be written and which ones shouldnt? ''
Every story should be written if its true (evidence) exists, that is freedom of the press, but that is not freedom to profit from ''human interest.''
The ''packages of articles'' spread by theorists are ...something else, and yes things would look different if say...Piers would have to take the stand. There's about 2000 of them.
The thing which are not on the surface...
RF privacy? They should have joined him, but that would create... a tiny problem.
This actually isn't about Harry(someone took photos of George )out of a car trunck, both-Tampongate, Squidgygate and the Sheikh are part of this.
Of course he will lose his case or it will be irrelevant, but there is more to this.
But you are right, its pointless, not because of the time, but because of the stolen evidence.
When a cop can be hired by the press to engage in criminal activity it paints a picture. Its not.. freedom, even Nixon would agree on that. And Nixon was on tape, those things that are missing somehow, and the computers, boxes, bugs...