In a groundbreaking and consequential legal judgment, Prince Harry emerged victorious in a phone hacking court case against the Mirror newspapers, with the judge pointing fingers at top company figures. The judgment revealed a tangled web of unlawful practices, cover-ups, and complicity within the organization.

According to the ruling by Mr. Justice Fancourt, Prince Harry was awarded £140,600 in damages. The judgment also unveiled that senior executives and editors at the Mirror newspapers were not only aware of but also concealed phone hacking and other unlawful information gathering activities. Former chief executive Sly Bailey, ex-legal director Paul Vickers, and former chief in-house lawyer Marcus Partington were explicitly implicated in the cover-up.

The most notable figure whose involvement was repeatedly referenced in the 386-page judgment was Piers Morgan. The judge scrutinized witness evidence against Morgan, upholding its reliability and concluding that no evidence had been presented to contradict the allegations. Furthermore, the judge accepted the testimony of writer Omid Scobie, who claimed to have witnessed Morgan discussing information related to hacking.

Beyond Prince Harry’s personal victory, this case casts a damning light on the Mirror papers and the newspaper industry as a whole. The judgment exposes a deep-rooted culture of illegality within the organization, with high-ranking executives tolerating and even encouraging intrusive activities while publicly denying any wrongdoing.

The implications of this ruling extend beyond Prince Harry’s case. The judgment joins a growing trend in hacking litigation, where unlawful activities beyond voicemail interception have gained prominence. Private investigators, commissioned by newspapers, have been implicated in various forms of unlawful information gathering, including stealing private data. This revelation suggests that other cases focusing on these grounds may still proceed despite some claims being dismissed.

The timeframe of the illegal practices is also significant. While the Mirror group previously admitted to seven years of wrongdoing between 1999 and 2006, Mr. Justice Fancourt’s ruling reveals that the unlawful activities persisted for 16 years, spanning from 1995 to 2011. Shockingly, these practices even continued during the Leveson Inquiry into press standards, as senior figures like Bailey, Vickers, and Morgan swore under oath that their papers were clean.

The verdict raises important questions about the potential perjury committed by the implicated individuals during the 2011-12 Leveson Inquiry. It also begs the consideration of whether the police and the Crown Prosecution Service should reopen investigations into these matters.

In addition to Prince Harry’s success, three other claimants were part of this test case, representing around 100 pending claims against the Mirror papers. While two of them, Nikki Sanderson and Fiona Wightman, had their claims rejected due to filing them too late, actor Michael Turner received damages amounting to £31,650.

This landmark judgment against the Mirror papers underscores the urgent need for accountability in the media industry. It serves as a reminder that privacy violations and unlawful practices can no longer be swept under the rug. As the fallout from this case reverberates, it remains to be seen how the industry will respond and whether further revelations will emerge.

Source: Byline Investigates