what.. you mean you DON'T leave hour long messages to people where you talk about all your secrets and salacious info?!I didn’t realise people left so much information on answerphones.
No you do not have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That is for criminal courts. Civil courts like this only require balance of probability. As the Mirror has already admitted hacking him once and apologised for it he is already half way there.I have no doubt he was hacked but the fact is, you have to actually PROVE it beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law and right now I don’t think he’s done that.
He’s included a story about Paul Burrel that he’s saying they must have got from a voicemail he left Prince William, well wouldn’t that actually mean they hacked Williams voicemail? Not Harry’s? So I don’t know that’s relevant
I would say that he should win. Like you said the Mirror have admitted to hacking him, they’ve admitted hacking others and paid out millions of pounds. There is a high balance of probability here.No you do not have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That is for criminal courts. Civil courts like this only require balance of probability. As the Mirror has already admitted hacking him once and apologised for it he is already half way there.
The problem is that "they did it before" isn't so good a piece of proof that it can prove on a balance of probability that they hacked where the stories ran in different papers the day prior, or similar.I would say that he should win. Like you said the Mirror have admitted to hacking him, they’ve admitted hacking others and paid out millions of pounds. There is a high balance of probability here.
I have just read Harry's full witness statement and it makes thoroughly depressing reading. The court will be looking at 50 examples* from him and his lawyers citing reasonable suspicions of what MGN was up to. Some of them are a bit flimsy but the sheer weight of them all is distressing. I was expecting to find the witness statement flimsier and I am now rather cross with the BBC for in no way managing to get across just how damning the whole thing is. If the other 3 participants in the case can produce similar, MGN is going to look very stinky indeed and could be landed with an enormous bill. No wonder they have employed such a notoriously unpleasant barrister, I am wondering if that might have been a mistake. We should also remember that MGN fought tooth and nail to get the whole thing struck out. I can now see why they would have been desperate to do so. I have also gained an understanding of why Harry has become so paranoid.The problem is that "they did it before" isn't so good a piece of proof that it can prove on a balance of probability that they hacked where the stories ran in different papers the day prior, or similar.
Even for a balance of probability outcome there needs to be strength to speculative accusations, and what's being reported on sounds like they chose weak examples.
While I think we can all agree that the press are too invasive, and that yes, they have previously hacked phones, that's not the question at hand. Harry's team need to prove, on balance of probability, that they did it to him (and the others, who hopefully have stronger cases) when accused.
If they've gone after MGN for articles and periods in which the speculative evidence is simply too weak, they in some ways undermine the previously proven examples of MGN being scummy, and give them something to point to as being victims. That would not be a good outcome.
I wondered this, could Harry just add a couple of his friends on to the case who want some money? It doesn’t seem he has any proof of phone hacking so could they just say it was their phone that was hacked for stories?So I am not very familiar with legal matters. The lawsuit if I got it correctly is made by a group of personalities. How does it work if some cases are stronger in term of evidences than others? How does the judge make an appreciation of who is a victim, who is not? Or it doesn't matter as long as some evidences are convincing?
Again, he doesn't need absolute proof. He needs balance of probability (over 50%). All he has to do is show a likely pattern of unethical/unlawful/illegal behaviour by MGN. As he has already had an apology from them for one instance he is well on his way. Also remember that we have only heard questioning from MGN's barrister who is nicknamed 'The Beast' because of his attitide to the people he questions. So far Harry seems to be coping pretty well in that he is not raising his voice, evading questions or losing his temper which is what the barrister would be hoping for.I wondered this, could Harry just add a couple of his friends on to the case who want some money? It doesn’t seem he has any proof of phone hacking so could they just say it was their phone that was hacked for stories?
And Paul Whitehouse's ex wife.Mirror Group Newspapers are being sued or whatnot by Harry, Michael Le Vell (Kevin in Corrie) and Nikki Sanderson (Hollyoaks ?)
The full witness statement is sad, but, then you can also read the article by Jan Moir, that says that in her opinion, Harry didnt always get negative stories written about him, so he is cherry picking the ones that do show just one side of the story.I have just read Harry's full witness statement and it makes thoroughly depressing reading. The court will be looking at 50 examples* from him and his lawyers citing reasonable suspicions of what MGN was up to. Some of them are a bit flimsy but the sheer weight of them all is distressing. I was expecting to find the witness statement flimsier and I am now rather cross with the BBC for in no way managing to get across just how damning the whole thing is. If the other 3 participants in the case can produce similar, MGN is going to look very stinky indeed and could be landed with an enormous bill. No wonder they have employed such a notoriously unpleasant barrister, I am wondering if that might have been a mistake. We should also remember that MGN fought tooth and nail to get the whole thing struck out. I can now see why they would have been desperate to do so. I have also gained an understanding of why Harry has become so paranoid.
* just a percentage of the whole.
Ah, Kerry Katona had her phone hacked. If they were bothered about her, then there is no way the 3rd in line (at the time) to the throne would have been considered ‘unimportant’ enough to hack. At the time, it didn’t matter who you were, it was just a pretty routine way of getting a story.The full witness statement is sad, but, then you can also read the article by Jan Moir, that says that in her opinion, Harry didnt always get negative stories written about him, so he is cherry picking the ones that do show just one side of the story.
My biggest issue in this whole sorry mess, is that I honestly dont think H was important enough to hack. maybe he was unlucky enough to be hacked by accident, but almost all of these stories are fillers. A spare couple of inches.....what can we add in here...oh I know, a puff piece about Prince Harry breaking his thumb.
These kind of stories dont need hacking, they just need educated guesses. Young man breaks thumb, doctors general advice would be to rest it for 2 weeks, and the Mirror, or People, run a story.
I do think its sad that H had such a depressing and unhappy childhood, and that due to a contractual arrangement, he was born into the Royal family and had his entire life documented in such detail. Its a great example to show that money definitely doesnt bring happiness.
I am no legal expert at all. Im finding the case fascinating, because it is.... And wondering where H is going to end up in the court of public opinion, which ultimately is where his biggest judgements will come from.
I think he is failing badly and even if he wins, this case is going to end up being awful for him! What do others think?
Yeah, you can always rely on Jan Moir and the Mail to be straight down the line and unbiased when it comes to Harry. Not.The full witness statement is sad, but, then you can also read the article by Jan Moir, that says that in her opinion, Harry didnt always get negative stories written about him, so he is cherry picking the ones that do show just one side of the story.
My biggest issue in this whole sorry mess, is that I honestly dont think H was important enough to hack. maybe he was unlucky enough to be hacked by accident, but almost all of these stories are fillers. A spare couple of inches.....what can we add in here...oh I know, a puff piece about Prince Harry breaking his thumb.
These kind of stories dont need hacking, they just need educated guesses. Young man breaks thumb, doctors general advice would be to rest it for 2 weeks, and the Mirror, or People, run a story.
I do think its sad that H had such a depressing and unhappy childhood, and that due to a contractual arrangement, he was born into the Royal family and had his entire life documented in such detail. Its a great example to show that money definitely doesnt bring happiness.
I am no legal expert at all. Im finding the case fascinating, because it is.... And wondering where H is going to end up in the court of public opinion, which ultimately is where his biggest judgements will come from.
I think he is failing badly and even if he wins, this case is going to end up being awful for him! What do others think?
I wouldn't bother to take my umbrella if Jan Moir told me it was raining! And for the umptythird time MGN has already admitted they hacked him once, and apologised, so yes, he obviously was 'important' enough.The full witness statement is sad, but, then you can also read the article by Jan Moir, that says that in her opinion, Harry didnt always get negative stories written about him, so he is cherry picking the ones that do show just one side of the story.
My biggest issue in this whole sorry mess, is that I honestly dont think H was important enough to hack. maybe he was unlucky enough to be hacked by accident, but almost all of these stories are fillers. A spare couple of inches.....what can we add in here...oh I know, a puff piece about Prince Harry breaking his thumb.
These kind of stories dont need hacking, they just need educated guesses. Young man breaks thumb, doctors general advice would be to rest it for 2 weeks, and the Mirror, or People, run a story.
I do think its sad that H had such a depressing and unhappy childhood, and that due to a contractual arrangement, he was born into the Royal family and had his entire life documented in such detail. Its a great example to show that money definitely doesnt bring happiness.
I am no legal expert at all. Im finding the case fascinating, because it is.... And wondering where H is going to end up in the court of public opinion, which ultimately is where his biggest judgements will come from.
I think he is failing badly and even if he wins, this case is going to end up being awful for him! What do others think?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?