The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 8: April - August 2023


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
It's a court of law, and His Majesty's High Court of Justice, one of the highest courts in the land, at that. A judge has issued a direction for witnesses to be present on a particular day. You don't just not show up because it didn't fit in with your kid's birthday party. Furthermore, over 100 other people are involved in the case against the Mirror, for which Harry's is one of 4 test cases, and I can't imagine the other defendants are very happy that the judge's back has been put up by Harry deciding not to bother turning up on time. Harry's arrogance is incredible.
 
Granada said:
Another breathtaking example of Harry's arrogance, that he purposely "missed" the opening day of his OWN Court case. When my daughter was a child and I was working, (as were many friends-family members and it could fall on a School day) I would have her Birthday Party 'celebration' on a Saturday.


His attorney, David Sherbourne, told The Court that The Duke would NOT attend the hearing today as He arrived in the UK late today after flying from California last night, where he had been celebrating his daughter's Birthday.

The Justice presiding over the case told the Court...."He was a little surprised ".

I'm not. Let the three ring circus begin .......
Click to expand...

I believe that here is the US that if the plaintiff does not attend the trial, the defendant can ask for it to be dismissed. I am not sure how it is in the UK.
 
The BBC article has a little more detail on it.

Earlier, the judge in the case, Mr Justice Fancourt, said he was a "little surprised" to hear the duke would not be attending court on Monday.

He had given an earlier direction that witnesses should be available on the first day of their individual case in case there was time to give evidence.

Mr Green, for MGN, accused the prince's side of "wasting time", saying it was "absolutely extraordinary we were told just last week that he is not available for day one of his own trial".

Mr Sherborne said Harry had flown in from Los Angeles after his daughter's birthday, and added: "He is in a different category from the three other claimants due to his travel and security arrangements."

So the judge seems to have directed that each witness be available on the fist day of their case, to help speed things along but Harry's lawyers seem to think he is above and beyond this applying to him.
 
duchessrachel said:
I believe that here is the US that if the plaintiff does not attend the trial, the defendant can ask for it to be dismissed. I am not sure how it is in the UK.
Click to expand...

In America, if the plaintiff does not attend the day of trial in which he was told to attend due to a personal event of choice, he would be fined as Contempt of Court. This would appear on the court records along with the amount of fine and when the fine was paid. Yes, the defendant could and most likely demand that the case be dismissed with plaintiff being required to pay court costs. This would NEVER happen to Prince Harry in UK [I believe] because of whom he is and case being so well publicized. But, I don't know if these laws are also common practice in UK. JMO
 
Well, I can tell you that Media reporting here in The States (as of 2:30 pm East Coast time) hasn't been "sympathetic" to Harry purposely skipping out on a mandated Court appearance. In his own case, no less.

The stated reason, to attend daughter Lili's 2nd Birthday is being met with derision and an unbelievable "are you kidding me" sense of arrogance on Harry's part. Messing around with The Court System's time and scheduling , by being a no -show ? In your own Case ? Who does that ?

With a Case already on *somewhat* shaky legal terms, do to some Analysts believing that he is suing PAST the Statue of Limitations.

Harry will have his hands full trying to convey in a convincing manner, specific and fact based detailed incidents that justify his allegations. While being challenged aggressively by skilled, and I'm assuming cut throat Legal Eagles representing Mirror Group Newspapers.

One TV reporter said because of his surprising no show appearance.... "The Trial was off to a rocky start".....yep, I'd have to agree !

After ALL the negative blowback The Sussex's got from their highly charged, over the top histrionics, of a " nearly catastrophic car chase " claims last month in NYC, that were debunked and mocked, Harry should not have done this. He should have simply appeared, and been ready to proceed.

Why he did this, is just baffling. It is insulting. And foolish.
 
Last edited:
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 8: Apr. 2023 -

tommy100 said:
The BBC article has a little more detail on it.

Earlier, the judge in the case, Mr Justice Fancourt, said he was a "little surprised" to hear the duke would not be attending court on Monday.

He had given an earlier direction that witnesses should be available on the first day of their individual case in case there was time to give evidence.

Mr Green, for MGN, accused the prince's side of "wasting time", saying it was "absolutely extraordinary we were told just last week that he is not available for day one of his own trial".

Mr Sherborne said Harry had flown in from Los Angeles after his daughter's birthday, and added: "He is in a different category from the three other claimants due to his travel and security arrangements."

So the judge seems to have directed that each witness be available on the fist day of their case, to help speed things along but Harry's lawyers seem to think he is above and beyond this applying to him.
Click to expand...



Harry’s lawyer is just relaying the excuses he was given by his client. That’s all he has. He has to tell the court something.

The problem is Harry had other priorities. Being on time for his own case wasn’t one.

Disrespecting the court and angering the judge is mindblowingly stupid.
 
I mean if Harry doesn't want to miss important dates to attend court dates back in the UK maybe he should just, well, erm....stop launching new cases
 
I’m not shocked Harry doesn’t seem to be taking this seriously. I think most people with any sense (or even people who have no sense but can afford expensive lawyers) understand that, if you’re called to give testimony in a lawsuit, the trial overrides basically everything else in your life, barring an accident or serious illness. That’s one of the reasons so many people settle before things get to this point.

I’d also love to know more about the special category Harry is apparently in that means he and his security need more than a few days notice to adjust his travel plans from LA to London by less than 24 hours.
 
camelot23ca said:
I’m not shocked Harry doesn’t seem to be taking this seriously. I think most people with any sense (or even people who have no sense but can afford expensive lawyers) understand that, if you’re called to give testimony in a lawsuit, the trial overrides basically everything else in your life, barring an accident or serious illness. That’s one of the reasons so many people settle before things get to this point.

I’d also love to know more about the special category Harry is apparently in that means he and his security need more than a few days notice to adjust his travel plans from LA to London by less than 24 hours.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it is special security. It’s any. The others are basically normal people…some very wealthy but normal.

And I have no doubt they were hacking. I don’t think I trust Harry to speak for them though.
 
:previous: Hmm, it sounds very strange that he should miss the first day of the case, but I think everyone would be wise to refer to the case precisely, i.e. Harry is merely one of four who have brought this action. There is so little reference to these people that they may as well not exist. Basically, context matters.

IMO Harry is finding the actual reality of giving testimony a lot harder than he thought. That has nothing to do with the merit of the suit itself but what I think may also be problematic for Harry is his father's stand on him testifying. It is one absolute that is actually verifiable.
 
Hallo girl said:
I would have thought he might have thought it prudent to arrive a day early anyway just to allow himself to rest and be ready to face the court refreshed. He possibly doesn’t wish to spend too much time in the uk. Or maybe thinks this is going to be a walkover and doesn’t need to be the top of his game.
Click to expand...

Especially since there is an eight-hour time difference between California and London. That's significant enough to possibly affect critical thinking.
 
Winnie said:
In America, if the plaintiff does not attend the day of trial in which he was told to attend due to a personal event of choice, he would be fined as Contempt of Court. This would appear on the court records along with the amount of fine and when the fine was paid. Yes, the defendant could and most likely demand that the case be dismissed with plaintiff being required to pay court costs. This would NEVER happen to Prince Harry in UK [I believe] because of whom he is and case being so well publicized. But, I don't know if these laws are also common practice in UK. JMO
Click to expand...

Thank you. I wasn't exactly sure.
 
It was certainly unwise of Harry to not be present on Day 1, but then, much of what Harry says and does is unwise in my opinion. Its a shame that it overlapped his daughter's birthday, but she's only 2 and wouldn't remember whether he was there or not. Perhaps the pressure to be present was from his wife, which is not unusual in many households, lets be honest, but it really didn't help his case. Perhaps he knows its a long shot in winning it? Who knows, we'll have to wait and see.
 
Here's a live feed - Sky today (if that's OK with the moderators) in case anyone can't access the BBC:

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-h...ss-diana-piers-morgan-mirror-william-12881275


One thought the sky feed mentions that did occur to me, that PH's army training - specifically his torture training - may help him keep his composure in the witness box, but this cross examination will last for about a day and a half - and this is for real.

Watching the footage of his arrival, I had to chuckle as from the aerial shots his bald head really stands out, considering his comments about William :lol:
 
If I was going through a Court Trial with the stakes as high as this, I would personally want someone I loved in Court as a soothing presence, a support. Someone to glance over to me, with a smile or a nod .....as I feel pressure during testimony or cross examination. Reassuring looks....

I have watched countless Movies and TV Shows, that demonstrate the power of a calming and comforting supporter in Court during emotional and stressful testimony. So, I'm surprised that Meghan isn't there.

The Sussex's made a big deal of them TOGETHER against......whatever. The Royal Family-Firm, Media, Whatever the "cause" was they were going to championship.

Remember the "salt and pepper" analogy that Meghan made ??? In The Cut Interview that SHE compared herself and Harry to that, "and that you never move one without the other ...... we always move together".

I guess I just find it curious that She isn't there. If that was my husband, I know I would be. Especially in view of the fact that a Trial is a hostile environment to begin with. I almost feel a little sorry for Harry, no family or friends will or can appear. Due to his own actions. And no-one would begrudge Meghan for being there as a support to her husband too.
 
Last edited:
The only impression I get is that he appears to be coached within an inch of his life. Does anyone remember the scene in Chicago - the song of they both reached for the Gun? When the lawyer coaches the witness to emphasis that they both went for the gun - it is not murder it was self defense.
That is what I am seeing here - all evidence. Every single line - the Press intruded on my life and ruined by childhood, causing me to make terrible decisions. Everything is their fault - even the erosion of the government - hey Western civilization itself because they published an article about me being lonely without my teddy. yes - the tabloids are to blame.
Pitiful man - I assure you for all his whining that he is not paranoid, the only thing we are all clear of now is that he is.
 
:previous:
:previous:

If it would be around the corner I suppose she might have been there. But IMO it wouldn't be sensible to leave your two young children on their own for a day or two (not sure how long the flight is), just to attend this hearing. The salt and pepper days are over, they are a family now and there are children that need attention.
 
Last edited:
Granada said:
If I was going through a Court Trial with the stakes as high as this, I would personally want someone I loved in Court as a soothing presence, a support. Someone to glance over to me, with a smile or a nod .....as I feel pressure during testimony or cross examination. Reassuring looks....

I have watched countless Movies and TV shows, that demonstrate the power of a calming and comforting supporter in Court during emotional and stressful testimony. So, I'm surprised that Meghan isn't there.

The Sussex's made a big deal of them TOGETHER against......whatever. The Royal Family-Firm, Media, Whatever the "cause" was they were going to championship.

Remember the "salt and pepper" analogy that Meghan made ??? In The Cut Interview that SHE compared herself and Harry to that, "and that you never move one without the other ...... we always move together".

I guess I just find it curious that She isn't there. If that was my husband, I know I would be. Especially in view of the fact that a Trial is a hostile environment to begin with. I almost feel a little sorry for Harry, no family or friends will or can appear. Due to his own actions. And no-one would begrudge Meghan for being there as a support to her husband too.
Click to expand...

Very good point. My late husband and I were just like the "salt and pepper" she described. If H&M hadn't burned their bridges with the family, they could have all come over as a family and MM and the children could have spent time with other members of the RF if she didn't want to be in Court. Another missed opportunity for those (IMO) isolated children :sad:

The bottom line (I think) is that she simply doesn't want to come to the UK, not because of possible booing etc. from the public, nor because of press attention which we've seen she thrives upon. My feeling is that she is not here because she's simply not interested in the UK, the UK people or the rest of Harry's family; she doesn't need anything from us or them anymore; we're surplus to requirements. She's moved on to the next chapter, and "looking after the children" is the perfect excuse - as used previously. It's possible she's not even particularly interested in the Court case.

It's also possible that Harry preferred to travel alone for a particular reason. Mind you, suing newspapers left right and centre is a very expensive way of having a bit of time out from the missus!
 
He is a deeply deeply disturbed man. I don't see how recounting each and every perceived insult, slight, and intrusion is going to help him heal. Revenge may be sweet ... but, it's usually at a price. JMHO
 
I was struck in reading the testimony by how often Prince Harry believes the press were doing surveillance even in stories where they got key facts wrong. (The example being that they printed Chelsy Davy was furious at him for attending a strip club when in fact she was ok with it)

It doesn’t seem to have occurred to him that the tabloid press sometimes get half a story and the rest is just insinuation/conjecture. Sometimes it’s just a guess based on what they can confirm, and it’s not hard to confirm a public figure visited a certain bar through legal tactics, like talking to the staff. He seems to have given the press more power in his own mind then they have.
 
shady lady said:
Very good point. My late husband and I were just like the "salt and pepper" she described. If H&M hadn't burned their bridges with the family, they could have all come over as a family and MM and the children could have spent time with other members of the RF if she didn't want to be in Court. Another missed opportunity for those (IMO) isolated children :sad:
Click to expand...


I feel badly for the king who probably would like to know his grandchildren, but at the same time must worry that anything said around his son and DIL might be splashed out into the next book.

To be fair to Harry, I was always appalled by the stories regarding James Hewitt so I can understand some of the testimony he gave today regarding how distressing that was for him. Diana was dead and gone, but Harry was a kid whose paternity was being publicly questioned. It probably had a lot to do with his overall insecure attitude as a member of the BRF.
 
Harry just had to go there.....He criticized angrily about "The state of our Press AND OUR GOVERNMENT which I believe are both at rock bottom".

Clever, very clever to make a populist attack against "The Government". To gin up support for his cause as a champion of those with no voice. A generic dig against "The Government" will certainly resonate with some. How many ? Pretty rich coming from the man who quit his Job AND his Country.

The Government isn't on Trial. Why go there ? Oh, I guess change laws to mollify Harry.
But that comment, I'm betting will be the takeaway line. "OUR Government is at rock bottom" ?

Very Edward Vlll like when, as Prince of Wales, he said in public during The Depression, to much popular acclaim....."something must be done" when seeing the plight and horrible conditions of Welsh Miners. His popularity, already sky high, surged. Needless to say "The Government" was furious at Prince Edward's overstepping the mark. Edward knew The Royal Family cannot comment on political matters. Especially a future King.

All it does is lead to controversy. Of which Harry is well aware. But he went there anyway. Purposely.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
 
Last edited:
Harry said that the Government were afraid to hold the media to account, and that the media therefore thought they were above the law. This is from the person who ignored the direction of a High Court judge because it didn't fit in with his kid's birthday party.
 
Apparently Harry has suggested that maybe his doctor’s phone was hacked- to explain some info the media had on an injury he had.

Response by attorney: Are we not, Prince Harry, in the realms of total speculation?
 
I am confused by Harry's testimony in general
If he was convinced that he would be expelled due to the cocaine stories - then why was he not expelled when it was confirmed he was smoking marijuana - Etons strict policy on drugs appears full of holes.

Harry said that the stores about his going on - was to make him seem a fool and playboy. At the time - he was the most popular member of the BRF. The public loved Harry - how did these stories damage his reputation. Did the story about the strip pool hurt his image - no it was brushed off as Harry the Lad. Sorry to say but his image and PR were improved by the coverage.
 
Emmily said:
It's the fault of the tabs that HE decided to play up to what was written about him? How old is he? Sounds like an excuse someone under the age of ten might use.
Click to expand...

“ In claiming such stories were “hurtful, mean and cruel”, the Duke laid bare his deep sense of unhappiness – not just with the media – but a life he seems now to wish was lived a different way.”


www.telegraph.co.uk

Prince Harry’s paranoia reveals a man who has failed to cope with his fame

Grilling at the hands of a KC was quite a bit tougher than Oprah
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
Harry's Witness Statement (documentcloud)

https://www.documentcloud.org/docum...-statement-of-prince-harry-the-duke-of-sussex

His legal name is "Henry", right? Shouldn't he use it for this lawsuit instead of "Harry"?

I'm not familiar with UK legal system, but the way it's been presented here, Harry can accuse MGN based on his assumptions/conjectures (or his feeling) instead of hard evidence and it's up to MGN to provide evidences that they didn't do it? Is that how it work in the UK?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
  • Sticky
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -
23 24 25
Replies
728
Views
76K
TLLK
T
Marengo
  • Locked
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 9: August 2023 - July 2024
103 104 105
Replies
3K
Views
494K
Ista
Ista
iceflower
The Duchess of Edinburgh's Fashion and Style, Part 2: July 2024 -
Replies
26
Views
2K
Elly C
Elly C
An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
King Felipe, Queen Letizia and Family, General News, Part 3
Replies
5
Views
2K
Somebody
Somebody
Somebody
Infanta Margrita and The Zurita Family General News: June 2024 -
Replies
1
Views
751
iceflower
iceflower

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom