Prince Harry accused of 'deleting' messages to 'Spare' ghostwriter amid lawsuit against British tabloids
LONDON, UK: Prince Harry has been ordered by a High Court judge to explain why a significant number of messages between him and the ghostwriter of his memoir, 'Spare', were deleted after launching a legal case against The Sun's publisher, News Group Newspapers (NGN), as reported by The Daily Mail.
Mr Justice Fancourt expressed concerns over the deletion of these messages, which occurred "well after" the Duke initiated phone hacking claims against the tabloid in 2019.
Prince Harry ordered to explain deleted messages in legal battle against The Sun
Mr Justice Fancourt expressed concern over the deletion of a significant number of messages between the Duke and the ghostwriter of his memoir 'Spare', JR Moehringer. These messages were wiped "well after" the Duke initiated phone hacking claims against NGN, the publisher of The Sun. The judge has mandated that Harry provide a statement clarifying what transpired.
The Duke, along with 40 others, is suing News Group Newspapers (NGN) for alleged phone hacking and other illegal activities, with the trial set to commence in January 2025.
In a preliminary hearing on Thursday, NGN requested the judge to mandate that Harry's team hand over a collection of documents potentially relevant to the case. Among these documents are messages exchanged between the Duke and Moehringer.
The American author, Moehringer, disclosed in an interview that he and Harry had been "texting around the clock" and that "no subject was off the table."
Mr Justice Fancourt stated it was "inherently likely" that relevant discussions took place between the Duke and his ghostwriter that could impact the case, which began in 2019. However, the messages exchanged on the Signal app have reportedly been deleted.
The judge remarked, "I have seen troubling evidence that a large number of potentially relevant documents and confidential messages between the duke and the ghost writer of 'Spare' were destroyed some time between 2021 and 2023, well after this claim was under way. The position is not transparently clear about what happened, and needs to be made so by way of a witness statement from the claimant himself."
NGN's barrister Anthony Hudson KC said, "It is, I'm afraid, we say, another example of the obfuscation in relation to the claimant's case. We say it's shocking and extraordinary that the claimant has deliberately destroyed…"
Mr Justice Fancourt interjected, saying, "Well, we don't know what has happened. It's not at all clear."
Harry's barrister David Sherborne confirmed that the "entire chat history was wiped," but he clarified, "This was a highly necessary process, not to hide anything but to delete highly sensitive information about (Harry) and the royal family which, if leaked, would not only compromise his security but also be potentially damaging to the [duke] and his family."
Sherborne dismissed the newspaper's application as "an old-fashioned fishing expedition" and asserted that there were no documents in existence regarding the publication of 'Spare'. He added that even drafts of the book had been destroyed.
The judge criticized Harry's legal team for the "apparent paucity" of documents they had provided to NGN during the disclosure stage of the legal process. It was revealed that Harry himself, rather than his lawyers, had been deciding which documents were relevant to the case. This raised concerns about the thoroughness of the document review.
NGN's lawyers are also seeking access to 36,000 emails between Harry and palace staff. Hudson accused Harry's legal team of resisting the disclosure of these emails.
Sherborne responded that three Hotmail accounts once used by Harry had been deactivated and were no longer accessible. However, he mentioned that Harry still had access to some email accounts associated with the royal household.
Harry's solicitors announced that two encrypted hard drives, previously thought to be "no longer in existence," had been found. One was located at Harry's mansion in California, and the other at the offices of his US attorney.
NGN argued that these drives might contain relevant material, but Sherborne maintained that the files on the drives were "office documents" from Harry's time as a working royal and were unlikely to be pertinent to the hacking case.
History of Prince Harry's case against News Group Newspapers
Prince Harry's lawsuit against the publisher of The Sun tabloid, alleging unlawful snooping, was allowed to proceed to trial last year by a High Court judge, albeit with limitations.
The judge ruled that the case cannot include allegations of phone hacking due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, but it can proceed on claims related to other forms of unlawful information gathering (UIG), such as hiring private investigators to gather information about him.
Justice Timothy Fancourt noted that while Prince Harry was aware of the phone hacking scandal that affected Britain over a decade ago, there was no evidence that he knew about other forms of UIG by News Group Newspapers (NGN) before the deadline for filing a suit.
NGN, owned by Rupert Murdoch, had argued that the claims should be dismissed due to the time limitation. The judge's decision significantly narrows the scope of Harry's legal claims, which originally included allegations of a secret settlement agreement between Buckingham Palace and Murdoch executives to delay his lawsuit.
The phone hacking scandal originally surfaced at News of the World, leading to its closure in 2011, and has since implicated other British tabloids. Despite settlements and apologies related to phone hacking, The Sun has not accepted liability for the allegations.
Prince Harry's legal battles over privacy violations are ongoing, with significant financial implications depending on the outcomes of these cases. He recently testified in a separate phone hacking lawsuit against the Daily Mirror's publishers, marking a departure from royal family tradition as he becomes deeply involved in legal proceedings.
