Connect with us

Published

on

Prince Harry is among a group of claimants who accuse the publisher of The Daily Mail newspaper of phone-tapping and other breaches of privacy.

Associated Newspapers deny the allegations and a preliminary High Court hearing starting today, will consider whether legal arguments and a judge will decide whether it will go any further.

It’s the latest of several cases brought against the tabloid press by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex over the last few years, and this is just one of several cases Prince Harry is currently involved in.

Here’s everything you need to know.

Liz Hurley speaks about breast cancer awareness
Image:
Liz Hurley is also included in the group of claimants
Elton John performs during his "Farewell Yellow Brick Road," tour, Friday, July 15, 2022, at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)
Image:
Sir Elton John and his husband are claimants in the case

Who’s involved?

The Duke of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd will take place at the High Court in London and is set to last four days.

While Prince Harry is one of the key players, as a group litigation he is not the only claimant.

The 38-year-old royal is bringing the action along with others including actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, Sir Elton John and his husband, filmmaker David Furnish, and Baroness Doreen Lawrence of Clarendon OBE.

David Sherborne is the lawyer representing Harry and the other claimants.

Associated Newspapers in west London
Image:
Associated Newspapers in west London

Who are Associated Newspapers?

One of Britain’s biggest media publishers, Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) is the publisher of the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline.

Full details of the claims have not yet been made public, following an earlier application by Associated Newspapers who say the claimants’ use of information is in breach of a restriction order made by Lord Justice Leveson.

As a result the judge has sealed the claims until that issue has been resolved, which will be part of next week’s public hearing.

Read more:
Prince Harry’s ‘intimate conversation’ felt more like watching a therapy session – and it cost us £17.99 each
Harry and Meghan dismiss ‘baseless’ lawsuit claims over South Park episode

Harry and Meghan Netflix documentary trailer. Pic: Netflix
Image:
Harry and Meghan stepped away from royal duties in 2020. Pic: Netflix

What’s alleged?

Lawyers for the claimants have said they had become aware of “highly distressing” evidence revealing they had been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by Associated Newspapers.

Accusations include:

• The hiring of private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside people’s cars and homes

• The commissioning of individuals to surreptitiously listen into and record people’s live, private telephone calls while they were taking place

• The payment of police officials, with corrupt links to private investigators, for inside, sensitive information

• The impersonation of individuals to obtain medical information from private hospitals, clinics, and treatment centres by deception

• The accessing of bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions through illicit means and manipulation

Associated Newspapers have strongly denied the allegations, describing them as “preposterous smears”, and claiming the legal action taken is “a fishing expedition by [the] claimants and their lawyers”.

Lord Justice Sir Brian Leveson before the State Opening of Parliament, in the House of Lords at the Palace of Westminster in London.
Image:
Lord Justice Sir Brian Leveson

What was the Leveson Inquiry and why is it relevant?

In 2011, judge Sir Brian Leveson led a public inquiry after it was revealed News Of The World journalists had hacked the phone of murdered school girl Milly Dowler.

Initially intended to be carried out in two sections, the first part of the Leveson Inquiry looked at the culture, practices and ethics of the press. It involved celebrities including Hugh Grant, Sienna Miller, Steve Coogan and Charlotte Church.

During the inquiry, Paul Dacre, who was editor of the Daily Mail between 1992 and 2018, and is now Associated Newspapers’ editor-in-chief, “unequivocally” condemned “phone hacking and payments to the police”, saying “such practices are a disgrace and have shocked and shamed us all.”

He said: “They need to be purged from journalism and reforms instigated to prevent such criminal activities ever happening again.”

The counsel for Associated Newspapers at the time, Jonathan Caplan, told the inquiry that “so far as [Associated] is aware no journalist at Associated Newspapers has engaged in phone-hacking.

“It does not bribe police officers and, in particular, it condemns the shameful practice of hacking the mobile phones of the victims of crime, or of their families.”

Part two of the Leveson Inquiry was meant to investigate the relationship between journalists and the police, but never took place. There have since been calls to re-open the uncompleted inquiry, with activists including those from the Hacked Off campaign saying such cases as this show wrongdoing within some newspapers is still taking place.

A stock image of a pile of newspapers including The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail, Daily Express and The Sun. Picture date: Saturday February 20, 2021.

Who else is Prince Harry taking to court?

This is not the only legal battle Prince Harry is fighting.

The royal has an ongoing libel case against Associated Newspapers over an article about his security arrangements in the Mail on Sunday. The paper says the article was based on “honest opinion”. He has a separate legal fight against the Home Office over the same protection issues.

In May, his lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), the publisher of the Daily Mirror, over accusations of phone hacking between 1996 and 2011, will go to trial.

Other celebrities involved in the case include former Girls Aloud bandmate Cheryl, actor Ricky Tomlinson, ex-footballer and TV presenter Ian Wright and the estate of the late singer George Michael. MGN has contested the claims and argues that some have been brought too late.

And he is also suing News Group Newspapers (NGN), the publisher of The Times, The Sunday Times and The Sun newspapers (as well as the now-defunct News of the World) for alleged phone-hacking. The Sun has always denied phone hacking took place at the paper, and the publisher has not admitted any unlawful conduct at the title.

The Princess of Wales holds son Prince Harry while royal families posed for photographers at the Royal Palace, Majorca, Spain on Sunday, August 9, 1987. Prince Charles and Princess Diana with their two children William and Henry are spending a week’s vacation on the island as guests of King Juan Carlos and his family. (AP Photo/John Redman)
Image:
The Princess of Wales holds an infant Prince Harry in 1987

Why is Prince Harry doing this?

Prince Harry’s hatred of the British tabloid press is well-documented – he has written about it at length in his memoir Spare and spoken about it in numerous resulting TV interviews.

He has said he blames the paparazzi for the part they played in his mother’s death and vented his frustration at the “injustice” of no one being sent to jail following the inquest into the car crash that killed her.

He has also said that media intrusion was part of the reason he and Meghan stepped back from royal duties in 2020 and moved to America.

Just this year Prince Harry accused members of his family of getting into bed with the devil – the tabloid press – to sully him and his wife Meghan to improve their own reputations.

He has called it his “life’s work” to change the British “media landscape,” making it more accountable for its actions. With a high profile and deep pockets, it’s a mission he’s started in earnest.

It remains to be seen whether the tell-all interviews, a revealing memoir and now numerous court cases assist Prince Harry in his crusade against the media, or simply fuel the fire he says he is so keen to put out.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Sherlock star Benedict Cumberbatch’s ‘very odd job’ – acting opposite an enormous bird in The Thing With Feathers

Published

on

By

Sherlock star Benedict Cumberbatch's 'very odd job' - acting opposite an enormous bird in The Thing With Feathers

He’s played Sherlock Holmes, Doctor Strange, and even voiced The Grinch but acting opposite a seven-foot (2.1m) crow may be one of the strangest roles Benedict Cumberbatch has taken on. 

Speaking about his new film, The Thing With Feathers, he admits it’s “a very odd job, there’s no getting away from it”.

If the vision of Cumberbatch wrestling with a giant bird sounds like the sort of amusingly surreal movie you fancy taking a look at next week, it’s important to understand that this is no comedy.

Pic: The Thing With Feathers/Vue Lumiere
Image:
Pic: The Thing With Feathers/Vue Lumiere

Pic: The Thing With Feathers/Vue Lumiere
Image:
Pic: The Thing With Feathers/Vue Lumiere

While the film, based on Max Porter’s eclectic novella Grief Is The Thing With Feathers, the film is at times disturbingly funny, but mostly it is an incredibly emotional take on the heartbreaking way we all process grief.

Cumberbatch plays a man whose wife has died suddenly, leaving him with their two young boys. The story itself is split into three parts – dad, boys and crow.

Crow – voiced by David Thewlis – is a figment of dad’s imagination, a sort of “unhinged Freudian therapist” for him, according to Porter.

Cumberbatch, a father of three, said this certainly wasn’t a role he wanted to think about when he returned to his own family each night.

More on Benedict Cumberbatch

“I didn’t take it home, I didn’t talk about it…You have to work fast when you’re a father of three with a busy home life, you know, it’s very immediate the need they have of you, so you don’t go in and talk about your day crying your eyes out on a sofa with a crow punching you in the face.”

Benedict Cumberbatch in The Thing With Feathers. Pic: Vue Lumiere
Image:
Benedict Cumberbatch in The Thing With Feathers. Pic: Vue Lumiere

Since Porter’s award-winning work was first published in 2015 it has built a cult following.

Using text, dialogue and poetry to explore grief from various characters’ perspectives, the author says the subject matter is universal.

“Most of us are deeply eccentric in one way or another, like my father-in-law, apparently a very rational, blokey bloke, who’s like ‘when my mum died, a wren landed on the window and I knew it was my mum’.

“Grief puts us into these states where we are more attuned to the natural world and particularly more attuned to symbols and signs. So, imagining a crow moving in with the family actually makes a lot of sense to people, whereas, weirdly, five steps to getting better or get well soon or a hallmark card or whatever doesn’t make much sense to the people when you’re in that storm of pain.”

Read more from entertainment news:
Wicked star ‘felt really scared’ growing up gay in school
Pope Leo meets with film stars and directors at Vatican

While the film sees Cumberbatch portray a firestorm of emotions, he says he feels it’s important to tackle weighty issues on screen.

Benedict Cumberbatch
Image:
Benedict Cumberbatch

Max Porter
Image:
Max Porter

“It is a universal experience, in one way or another you’re ‘gonna lose someone that you love during your life.”

The film, he says, explores grief through a male prism.

“At a time when there’s a lot of very troubling influences on men without female presence in their lives, this thing of scapegoating and seeing the other as a threat, all of that comes into play within the allowance of grief to be a messy, scary, intimidating, chaotic, unruly and out of control place to exist as a man.

“This is a film that just leans into the idea that it’s alright to have feelings, you bury them or hide them at your peril.”

The Thing With Feathers is out in cinemas in the UK and Ireland on 21 November.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

‘I felt really scared and I felt alone’ – Wicked star Jonathan Bailey on growing up gay in school

Published

on

By

'I felt really scared and I felt alone' - Wicked star Jonathan Bailey on growing up gay in school

“I felt scared and I felt alone and I felt entirely limited at various points in my life”, actor Jonathan Bailey says of growing up gay in school.

While promoting Wicked: For Good, the actor donated one of his interview slots to talk about the charity he is a patron of: Just Like Us, which works with LGBT+ youth in schools.

“That’s something that I would have really benefited from when I was young,” he said, talking exclusively to Sky News about his charitable work.

In surveys of thousands of UK pupils, Just Like Us found that LGBT participants aged 11 to 18 were twice as likely to suffer anxiety, depression and to be bullied, and that only half felt safe at school on a daily basis.

“I experienced all of that,” he said. “It became clear quite early on that something that was very specific and clear to me about who I was, it wasn’t safe and it wasn’t celebrated.”

Whether as Lord Anthony in Bridgerton, being crowned sexiest man alive and as the Winkie Prince Fiyero in Wicked: For Good, Bailey has broken through an outdated stereotype.

Historically, it was considered a career risk to be out – a heterosexual romantic lead’s career was at risk if his sexuality was public.

More on Lgbt

For the Winkie prince actor, education can play a role in defying limitations.

While promoting Wicked: For Good, Bailey talked about a charity that works with LGBT+ youth in schools.. File pic: Just Like Us
Image:
While promoting Wicked: For Good, Bailey talked about a charity that works with LGBT+ youth in schools.. File pic: Just Like Us

“This is beyond sexuality,” he said, “it’s race, it’s class, it is where you’re from, we are all given limiting narratives that we have to break free of.

“I thought not only was I not going to be able to play these sorts of parts because of my sexuality, but that I wouldn’t be able to do Shakespeare because I didn’t go to drama school.

“They’re the sort of stories that we need to be reminded of is that actually standing up and being safe enough to be able to say who you really are, and to be vulnerable at that age… these formative years, is inspiring to everyone in the classroom.”

But classrooms in the UK are facing tightening budgets due to “spiralling costs” that threaten to outstrip the growth in school funding.

Citing budget and time pressures on teachers, Just Like Us has made its talks free in schools. Does the actor think the government should be doing more?

He said: “I’m a very proud brother of an incredible teacher who works in the state system, and I know how much she cares about her school, her pupils.

“The resources are being crunched, and the problem is that it will be the arts and it will be really important conversations that Just Like Us bring into the schools and these… things that are going to go, and that’s just really sad.

“But I’m not the person to come up with solutions other than I can do my bit.”

Bailey, Cynthia Erivo and Bowen Yang are among Wicked’s LGBT cast, and in Wicked: For Good, openly gay actor Colman Domingo joins them as the voice of the Cowardly Lion.

But not everyone is encouraging the onscreen representation: A “warning” by conservative group One Million Moms said that the Jon M Chu-directed films are “normalising the LGBTQ lifestyle” to children and takes aim at the cast.

The alert urges people to boycott the sequel “even if you have seen Wicked: Part One”.

Read more from Sky News:
Ariana Grande rushed by red carpet intruder at Wicked premiere
Man given 13-month prison sentence for stealing Banksy print
Budget 2025 income tax U-turn: What the hell just happened?

When asked about the pushback, Bailey is resolute: “I don’t even acknowledge… the thing that’s important to me is how do I chat to little Johnny in all this.

“I’m thrilled to be living in a time where I can play the Winkie Prince and where Just Like Us is doing the extraordinary work that they’re doing.”

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Donald Trump confirms he will sue the BBC over Panorama edit – despite broadcaster’s apology

Published

on

By

Donald Trump confirms he will sue the BBC over Panorama edit - despite broadcaster's apology

Donald Trump has said he will sue the BBC for between $1bn and $5bn over the editing of his speech on Panorama.

The US president confirmed he would be taking legal action against the broadcaster while on Air Force One overnight on Saturday.

“We’ll sue them. We’ll sue them for anywhere between a billion (£792m) and five billion dollars (£3.79bn), probably sometime next week,” he told reporters.

“We have to do it, they’ve even admitted that they cheated. Not that they couldn’t have not done that. They cheated. They changed the words coming out of my mouth.”

Mr Trump then told reporters he would discuss the matter with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer over the weekend, and claimed “the people of the UK are very angry about what happened… because it shows the BBC is fake news”.

The Daily Telegraph reported earlier this month that an internal memo raised concerns about the BBC’s editing of a speech made by Mr Trump on 6 January 2021, just before a mob rioted at the US Capitol building, on the news programme.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

BBC crisis: How did it happen?

The concerns regard clips spliced together from sections of the president’s speech to make it appear he told supporters he was going to walk to the US Capitol with them to “fight like hell” in the documentary Trump: A Second Chance?, which was broadcast by the BBC the week before last year’s US election.

More on Bbc

Following a backlash, both BBC director-general Tim Davie and BBC News chief executive Deborah Turness resigned from their roles.

‘No basis for defamation claim’

On Thursday, the broadcaster officially apologised to the president and added that it was an “error of judgement” and the programme will “not be broadcast again in this form on any BBC platforms”.

A spokesperson said that “the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited,” but they also added that “we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim”.

Earlier this week, Mr Trump’s lawyers threatened to sue the BBC for $1bn unless it apologised, retracted the clip, and compensated him.

The US president said he would sue the broadcaster for between $1bn and $5bn. File pic: PA
Image:
The US president said he would sue the broadcaster for between $1bn and $5bn. File pic: PA

Legal challenges

But legal experts have said that Mr Trump would face challenges taking the case to court in the UK or the US.

The deadline to bring the case to UK courts, where defamation damages rarely exceed £100,000 ($132,000), has already expired because the documentary aired in October 2024, which is more than one year.

Also because the documentary was not shown in the US, it would be hard to show that Americans thought less of the president because of a programme they could not watch.

Read more from Sky News:
Key findings in 20,000 pages of documents in the Epstein files

Banksy art theft lands burglar with 13-month prison sentence

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sky’s Katie Spencer on what BBC bosses told staff on call over Trump row

Newsnight allegations

The BBC has said it was looking into fresh allegations, published in The Telegraph, that its Newsnight show also selectively edited footage of the same speech in a report broadcast in June 2022.

A BBC spokesperson said: “The BBC holds itself to the highest editorial standards. This matter has been brought to our attention and we are now looking into it.”

Continue Reading

Trending