All About Harry’s Surprise Court Appearances This Week
“You simply don’t get members of the Royal Family turning up at court.”
The way I gasped when I woke up to new pictures Monday morning of Prince Harry! The Duke of Sussex made a series of surprise appearances at High Court in London this week, attending several days of early hearings in one of his cases against the publisher of the Daily Mail. This was a big deal — as one Sky News reporter observed, “You simply don’t get members of the Royal Family turning up at court.”
Below you’ll find a bit of a primer, including a look at the other claimants, what the group is alleging, and what Harry says the Firm kept from him. Then I’ve answered your questions from Instagram about whether or not Harry saw his father and brother, as well as what this could mean in terms of reconciliation and the coronation. Read on!
👑 A friendly reminder that we are in the midst of organizing coronation gatherings with other SMTers! Would you like to host a group, either in-person or virtually, on the morning of May 6 or at a later date? Scroll down for more info and the sign-up form.
🎧 I was a guest recently on Hello! magazine’s A Right Royal Podcast. It was a fantastic chat, filled with coronation predictions. You can listen on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you get your podcasts. My thanks to the Hello! team.
ICYMI: My One Quick Thought recommendations this week include a guide to cleaning Birks, your fantastic advice for Easter celebrations while traveling, and the SMT Spring Break shopping guide (so many cute swimsuits here!).
Over on Instagram, I took a look at Camilla’s fashion during King Charles’s first state visit to Germany. SMT in the caption here!
Paid subscribers can read this newsletter in full — so very many thanks for your support! If you haven’t already, please consider upgrading for $5 / month. You’ll also get access to the SMT coronation gatherings as well as my forthcoming coronation newsletters and podcast right here on Substack.
(If for any reason you can’t afford it, please sign up for a free subscription first and send me an email at Hello@SoManyThoughts.com.)
Harry’s Latest Case Against the Publisher of the Daily Mail
Let’s start at the beginning! What is this case about and who else is involved?
Prince Harry is one of several high-profile claimants in a case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), which publishes the Daily Mail, Mail Online, and the Mail on Sunday.
He is joined by singer/songwriter Sir Elton John, filmmaker David Furnish, actor Elizabeth Hurley, politician Sir Simon Hughes, actor Sadie Frost and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence, mother of Stephen Lawrence, a Black British teenager who was murdered in a racist attack three decades ago.
The parties involved allege ANL “carried out or commissioned illegal or unlawful information-gathering,” according to ITV. A press release from the group, issued last October, detail the claims as follows:
Hiring private investigators to place listening devices inside cars and homes
The “commissioning of individuals” to record of live, private telephone conversations
Payments to police for “inside, sensitive information”
Impersonation of individuals in order to obtain medical records
Accessing personal financial information, including bank accounts and credit histories, “through illicit means and manipulation”
“It is apparent to these individuals that the alleged crimes listed above represent the tip of the iceberg – and that many other innocent people remain unknowing victims of similar terrible and reprehensible covert acts. They have now therefore banded together to uncover the truth, and to hold the journalists responsible fully accountable, many of whom still hold senior positions of authority and power today.” — Press release issued on behalf of the claimants
Related: You may have heard the term “blagging” as part of the allegations. Sky News has a helpful explainer:
“‘Blagging’ refers to the process of getting hold of a person’s confidential information without their permission through covert means — for example, by pretending to be someone else. It can involve a ‘blagger’ engineering a specific scenario which lures their victim into giving away sensitive information or even money. You may have read about, or even been targeted by, fake messages from someone pretending to be a friend or family member asking for personal information — this is a form of blagging.”
When did these allegations occur and why are they bringing the case now?
The alleged acts took place between 1993 and 2011 but the claimants say they didn’t know they were victims until recently. “They argue they could not have brought the case earlier because they did not know they were potentially victims,” according to the Guardian. “The cases are being heard in a civil court, rather than a criminal court, because the cases have been brought by the alleged victims rather than a prosecution by the state after a police investigation.”
Keep reading for more on why Harry says he didn’t know about the alleged wrongdoings sooner. It also feels important to underscore what the prince shared in Spare, which is the dramatic effect this sort of intrusion had on his personal life. Furthermore, in his best-selling memoir he made it abundantly clear his mission is to hold the press accountable in the hopes that its coverage of, and relationship with, the royal family will change.
(The Guardian also explains how this case ties into the decade-old phone-hacking scandal, which resulted in the Leveson inquiry into press ethics, the shuttering of the News of the World tabloid and “hundreds of millions of pounds in damages and legal fees to people whose phones were hacked.”)
What does ANL have to say about the case?
ANL denies the allegations, calling them “preposterous smears” and asserting the legal action is “a fishing expedition by [the] claimants and their lawyers,” according to Sky News.
The publisher of the Mail is seeking to get the case struck down before trial on two grounds. The first is statute of limitations, claiming most of what is alleged happened before 2007. It also alleges the claimants “unlawfully obtained evidence against ANL, using material from a government report that was under a strict confidentiality ruling,” according to NPR.