Prince Harry's phone hacking case against the Daily Mail is dismissed in full
During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time “because of the…
- Center-left2
- Center-right1
- Right3
2 agency rewrites / co-publications detected
Summary
During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time “because of the institution I was in”. As part of its defence, ANL said that Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provide a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, including friends and “leaky” social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies. The case brought by the Duke of Sussex and six fellow claimants, also including Sir Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley , was heard at a three-month trial at London ’s High Court at the beginning of this year.
Furthermore, The trial judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, accepted that every article complained about was lawfully sourced. Why Baroness Lawrence – for whom we have always had profound respect and sympathy – chose to turn on both the paper, and the brilliant reporter who campaigned for justice for her son for over two decades, is something I will never be able to comprehend. During the 11-week trial at the High Court earlier this year, a tearful Duke of Sussex said that ANL had “made my wife’s life an absolute misery” and recounted intrusions on the private life of his former girlfriend Chelsy Davy by members of the newspaper group.
In addition, 14 articles: Harry’s case hinges on stories published between 2001 and 2013 The Duke of Sussex claimed 14 articles published by ANL were based on unlawful information gathering. A further hearing in the claims is now expected to take place, lasting two days from July 29. In an executive summary of his judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin said: ‘Associated called journalist witnesses who gave lawful explanations for the sourcing of the disputed articles and incidents.
Moreover, 'This is a magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism.
Cross-referenced from 4 sources.
Factual coreconfirmed by several independent voices
During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time “because of the institution I was in”.
reliability moderate2/2 sourcesAs part of its defence, ANL said that Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provide a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, including friends and “leaky” social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies.
reliability moderate2/2 sourcesThe case brought by the Duke of Sussex and six fellow claimants, also including Sir Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley , was heard at a three-month trial at London ’s High Court at the beginning of this year.
reliability low1/3 sourcesThe trial judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, accepted that every article complained about was lawfully sourced.
reliability low1/3 sourcesWhy Baroness Lawrence – for whom we have always had profound respect and sympathy – chose to turn on both the paper, and the brilliant reporter who campaigned for justice for her son for over two decades, is something I will never be able to comprehend.
reliability low1/2 sources
Reported detailssecondary facts, each attributed to its source
During the 11-week trial at the High Court earlier this year, a tearful Duke of Sussex said that ANL had “made my wife’s life an absolute misery” and recounted intrusions on the private life of his former girlfriend Chelsy Davy by members of the newspaper group.
according to The Independent - UK News14 articles: Harry’s case hinges on stories published between 2001 and 2013 The Duke of Sussex claimed 14 articles published by ANL were based on unlawful information gathering.
according to The Independent - UK NewsA further hearing in the claims is now expected to take place, lasting two days from July 29.
according to Evening Standard - NewsIn an executive summary of his judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin said: ‘Associated called journalist witnesses who gave lawful explanations for the sourcing of the disputed articles and incidents.
according to Daily Mail +1'This is a magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism.
according to Daily Mail +1
Disputedincompatible versions — to verify
No factual contradiction detected between sources.
Framing by sidesame fact, different words — loaded terms highlighted
No notable framing divergence.
Blind spotwhat one side keeps silent
In a statement, the publisher continued: “Mr Justice Nicklin today cleared the Daily Mail and The Mail On Sunday, and dismissed every…
omitted byLeft sidecovered byRight sideWhy Baroness Lawrence – for whom we have always had profound respect and sympathy – chose to turn on both the paper, and the brilliant…
omitted byLeft sidecovered byRight sideThe case brought by the Duke of Sussex and six fellow claimants, also including Sir Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley , was heard at a…
omitted byRight sidecovered byLeft sideRight sideDuring around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the…
omitted byRight sidecovered byLeft sideRight sideThis was a conspiracy, supported by Hacked Off, to destroy a paper.
omitted byRight sidecovered byLeft sideRight side
Sources6 sources cross-checked
Center-right1