Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.

VC10

VIP Member
I'm puzzled that so many articles were written about Harold (and William) from 1996 when he was 11, about private stuff that should have stayed private. Green asked Harold if one article written about him aged 11 upset him, and did he remember it?
The glandular fever story and broken thumb were nobody's business, he was at school. It seems from Green's examination that PC's spin doctor Mark Bolland co-operated with NOTW about the drugs story in 2002 when Harold was 18.

There's no public interest justification, and reporting on minors like this was a betrayal. I can't imagine helping the press with briefings about my son.

I'm very behind on the thread but this is what's emerging for me and I don't understand why he and William weren't protected as youngsters. This has certainly played a big part in what's happening now. The articles about him from childhood were all negative and the image of him fixed for ever is a thick weak child who cheated to get in. All true, but he was under age. Why was it allowed? No Red Line here for the children, that is my only point.

So far, no hacking or eavesdropping, and though Harold is making a fool of himself he has also exposed how he and his brother were subject to media intrusion. Clever Green will trip the addled Stoat up with when exactly he had a mobile phone, but that is not the point. This is Harry's Hill that he will die on, it's not the children.
Who cares about Harry.

William is fine , he's a Man who will be King. With a superb Wife who is intelligent that share a deep, mutual love , and is a beauty in her own right, and a lovely Family .
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 42

ChipDex

VIP Member
He doesn't even have any evidence to back up his claim of phone hacking. This is just ridiculous.
I may have been hacked every day over 15 years
Harry tells the court he filed his claims against MGN and News Group “at around the same time”.
He adds that he believes there was “industrial scale destruction of evidence” of unlawful information gathering in relation to him to which Mr Green asks where he gets this idea from.
“My legal team,” Harry replies.
Mr Green asks whether he thinks his phone was “consistently hacked” throughout the 15-year period between 1996 and 2011, the time period that makes up his claim against MGN.
“It could have been happening on a daily basis, I simply don’t know,” Harry responds.
Asked if he was aware of any evidence to show this, Harry says: “No, that’s part of the reason I’m here, my lord”.
BIB

There are no words, are there? Do we have a 'facepalm' emoji?

He's come to court with no concrete evidence???????

Is he expecting the Judge to magically produce the evidence out of a hat, or something?

Does he know that if you're a plaintiff, you're expected to come to court with a bit more than 'suspicions' and 'may haves' and 'I don't knows'?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 42

toomuchstuff

VIP Member
He doesn't even have any evidence to back up his claim of phone hacking. This is just ridiculous.
I may have been hacked every day over 15 years
Harry tells the court he filed his claims against MGN and News Group “at around the same time”.
He adds that he believes there was “industrial scale destruction of evidence” of unlawful information gathering in relation to him to which Mr Green asks where he gets this idea from.
“My legal team,” Harry replies.
Mr Green asks whether he thinks his phone was “consistently hacked” throughout the 15-year period between 1996 and 2011, the time period that makes up his claim against MGN.
“It could have been happening on a daily basis, I simply don’t know,” Harry responds.
Asked if he was aware of any evidence to show this, Harry says: “No, that’s part of the reason I’m here, my lord”.
So sadly Harold didn't realise that he was supposed to bring proof into the courtroom.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 42

CELESTE CROCKETT

VIP Member
download (25).jpeg
You know I'd be one of those women knitting at the guillotine along with many fellow tattlers ....that's me with me head thrown back
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 42

LadyMuck

VIP Member
Maybe H is a patsy for Hugh Grant and his group Hacked Off.

Hugh has never forgiven the press for catching him getting blown off by Divine Brown. Lol
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Heart
Reactions: 42

Silverplume

Active member
Not really, Charles doesn't need to pander to Harry, just get on with what he's doing
I agree. A few years ago, our younger grown kid decided he was perfect and we were not and therefore to be ignored. Fine, we said. Ignored him, too, for two years until he came to his senses and returned to the family with humility and sincere remorse. Never once did I consider trying to “reach out,” as it was pointless and weak.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Wow
Reactions: 42

Jelly Bean

VIP Member
They prob read this thread tbh
---



like i said on the previous thread there are people in the backround controlling & using Gingernuts for thier own nerferious reasons only numbnuts is too thick to see it
Well one commentator did say there was a good reason MGN chose to pay off other complainants but not Harry. They knew they had an excellent chance of making him look stupid. And he walked right into it.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 42

spangly

VIP Member
What has happened to Harry? All the photos I've seen of him lately, he looks like a cross between a hunched up gerbil and a wisened old gnome!
Do you think he's so used to being subservient. he can't properly unfold himself any more?
His face is starting to look like a gurner without their false teeth in!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 42

Piglet&Pooh

VIP Member
So finally he has HARD EVIDENCE

Hard Evidence that points to...

*drumrolls*


SUSPICIOUSNESS!!!


😂 🤡 😂 🤡 😂🤡


View attachment 2223316


Oh, God. They are so stupid. I am so done.

Any Lawyers out there?

Is this a potential legal issue? Harry didn't instruct solicitors himself. He was approached by a barrister - who I do not believe usually works directly with the public who told him that he might have a case (I presume based on other clients who were already representing). Is this ethical for a barrister to approach a potential client directly? It adds to the impression that this is not Harry's case at all but the lawyers' case (they chose the cases, wrote much of Harry's statement, have fed him phrases about the public interest). Obviously from Sherborne's point of view it has made the case much more high profile and dramatic by adding a RF member to his case

Could this answer count against him with the judge that he was basically "invited to sue" by a King's Counsel rather than Harry approaching lawyers himself?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 41

LadyMuck

VIP Member
Paul won't want to go through the courts again so Harry will get away with defaming him.

My friend used to work with Paul's brother. They often went to stay with Paul.
When Paul was accused, it was the Spencers who accused him.
One of Diana's sisters was executor of her will. Can't remember which one, sorry but I do remember the details.

In addition to the actual Wiil, there was a letter of intent from Diana indicating which items she wanted her Godchildren to have.
The sister decided that those items should not be given and she ignored Diana's wishes by giving the godchildren something else instead.
The sister was being bullish and taking stuff she thought Diana's "blood family" should now be custodians of.

Paul was horrified by this because he knew Diana so well and he knew what bits Diana wanted "her boys" to have.
When the sister didnt give the godchildren the keepsakes Diana had intended, he decided to move stuff that he knew Diana wanted William and Harry to have so that the sister couldnt take them Into Spencer controlled storage.
He took them for safe keeping while the sister was going through Diana's stuff like a tornado.
He then intended to give the stuff to the boys but never got chance because of what happened next.
Another member of the Royal household staff had taken some of Diana's stuff without permission - if I remember correctly, a painting was one of them. It appeared somewhere in the USA for sale.
The Spencer sister wrongly assumed Burrell had stolen it and was trying to sell it.
So she instigated the police inquiry and legal action against Burrell.
We know what happened next. He never got chance to give the stuff to "the boys." It was removed from his home and he was accused of stealing it with the intent to sell it for personal gain.

I know a lot of people hate the guy but he LOVED Diana and will never betray her.

Yes he got a bit carried away talking to the press after she died but he was caught up in that WEIRD bubble we were all in. It was a very strange atmosphere and we were all acting as if under some kind of spell.
He was affected by that craziness as were thousands of people.

Sadly now, he has been defamed AGAIN. This time by Harry who knows Paul will not want to go to court and drag all of that awfulness up again.

Just when you think Harry is the shittiest shit there could ever be, he goes and does something even more shit.


It's high time he got his come uppance.
Come ON court case - humiliate him and rule against him.
Come ON USA officials - slap him with a tax bill for a shit ton of money then deport him.

It's time he was taught a lesson.
Great insight, thanks Chita. Awful Spencer sister. Yet Paul, for all his faults, has never spoken badly about the Spencers.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 41