The Iffy-Wiff Club: The Sussexes Legal Action Part 1

[wannable]

Harry's court crusade will define him. And it?ll never end
The Duke of Sussex is on a mission and nothing will deter him from pursuing it, writes Roya Nikkhah

Roya Nikkhah
Royal Editor
Sunday June 11 2023, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times

[PrincessOfPeace]

From Jack Royston -

"Prince Harry told a judge that a tabloid story about him having glandular fever led to him being "teased endlessly" at school, but he has revealed private details about members of his family, including his niece Princess Charlotte, in his best-selling book." -

Basically an article saying Harry doesn't mind sharing private details of others when it suits him -

Prince Harry's Media Broadside Damns His Own Book

[Nightowl]

Harry's court crusade will define him. And it?ll never end
The Duke of Sussex is on a mission and nothing will deter him from pursuing it, writes Roya Nikkhah

Roya Nikkhah
Royal Editor
Sunday June 11 2023, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times

This will be Harry's life work, this will go on forever mow as he will be defined by it.  So we all can sit back and watch for the next book, chapter, interview, or TV show.........popcorn is ready!

[Curryong]

All those media broadsides for Harry?- from journalists employed by newspaper conglomerates that he is suing, and therefore are completely unbiased, lol. There has been enough dirty fish come out in various testimonies so far, however, to show just what these newspaper editors and their minions were and are capable of, and yes that includes people like Piers Morgan.

[Nightowl]

Both sides be damned, there is enough blame on every party involved to be criticized regardless of who they are be an editor or a royal prince...Harry is not blameless in all this as he has shown us his true colors....lying about being married 3 days before the wedding (Yes Meghan) and making fun of a disabled woman in her mid years, give me a break...I will say, yes the media was cruel to the Sussex's as the media was cruel to all the royal women HM, Camilla, Sophie and Catherine, (and I am sure there are others also)  regardless of who  they were. Some dealt with it by being tough and not giving into the media and some ran away afraid to just turn your back and not give in to the media, regardless of who is right or wrong or who did what, the media needs to learn to not over step the boundaries of decency, common sense and honesty.   Making up lies (Harry, Meghan and the Media, and the royal family) all to gain wealth does not support the country or the people, money has become the God of certain people and that brouds disaster for all.

[wannable]

What are the 'dirty fish',  links please?  So far the The Mirror KC Green has refuted H's claims. IF IF IF there were any dirty fish, the worldwide media would have it as huge headlines and top top front page news, but it didn't happen.

Also links please to Charles entering the scene in the Sussex Team Legal actions thread.

Harry in his legal action 100% blamed the press, 0% the palace

But yeah all his grievances is 100% everyone else, he is perfect.

Mentioning Charles in this team Sussex legal action is a fantasy.  Harry did not blame his father in any of the 33 articles.  The 33 articles by the defence was proved taken from originator (other media outlets) or Harry's own press secretary. Harry said under oath that the palace operates to protect him, hence he finds the media suspicious.

Note: I am only asking links and what not, because I am requested to do so, but have noted others aren't required, there's a double standard including posting personal fan comments from social media.  Remember, Curryong complained about a personal fan comment I had posted months ago, it was taken down.  To be honest I don't care, I'm not petty, but am putting this note for ''awareness''.

[Nightowl]

A big *Thank You*!

[wannable]

^It's nothing, anyway thank you. Awareness has many reaches to be honest. IF one is in agreement with a fan who has posted their thoughts, why am I going to plagiarize  rather than just post it and say I agree with this person rather than complain with a 'oh so now resorting to', then be warned by a free of charge no salary RIF worker whom time is then wasted, has to make a rule, only for someone to be quiet about it when it has to do with a favorite?!

With the Sussexes 1 hour a week of work (IRS tax filled out by them or their employee accountant stating in a government form 40, 30 or other, other 1 hour a week), I don't see why anyone should complain about posting all possible things done by them, their employees or their fan base. For real, hence I said 'thank you' in their team Sussex. IF I ever use it as an example when complaints are done to a working royal, it is just an example to open ones eyes with the charge of intent/whatever is the intent to a RIF member.

Just a further reflexion, just in case I'm not clear enough  :flower: :flower: :flower: :flower:

[TLLK]

Prince Harry's unique role does not exempt him from burden of truth, says Mirror

The Duke of Sussex?s ?unique role? in public life does not exempt him from the burden of proof, the Mirror newspaper has argued as its phone hacking case comes to a close.
In closing submissions, the tabloid said it was impossible not to have ?enormous sympathy? for Prince Harry given the media intrusion he has been subjected to throughout his life.
However, it said he had failed to identify any examples of phone hacking or unlawful information gathering at its newspapers.
And it accused him of bringing the litigation ?as a vehicle to seek to reform the British media? as part of his ongoing crusade.
The Duke sued Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over unlawful information gathering, including phone hacking, citing 148 articles he alleged had been obtained illegally.

[wannable]

Judge tells Prince Harry's lawyer to ''show me the evidence''

A judge has told the Duke of Sussex's lawyer to ''show me the evidence'' instead of making claims in his lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN).
Mr Justice Fancourt, presiding over the case, made the comments while listening to the Duke of Sussex?s barrister give his closing speech on Wednesday.
He told David Sherborne, representing the Duke and three other high-profile claimants, to ''show me the evidence, not just assertions by you'' of particular examples of voicemail interception in the Duke's case.

By India McTaggart,
ROYAL CORRESPONDENT
28 June 2023 ? 2:41pm
The Telegraph

[Blue Clover]

I hope Harry has evidence.

[wannable]

The Mirror did state in the early proceedings an apology for 1 nightclub account. 

^ The above is the ''closing'' of the hearings, the Judge requested H lawyers to show evidence. None. Anyway I'm very curious for the outcome, only because of Tom Bower's statement. The royals never lose.

[wannable]

The Times and The Sunday Times
@thetimes

The Duke of Sussex's lawyers used a convicted phone hacker who paid private detectives to give evidence, the high court has been told.

Andrew Green KC, representing Mirror Group Newspapers, highlighted the ''extremely close collaboration'' between Harry's legal team and convicted hackers Graham Johnson and Dan Evans, who both gave evidence on behalf of Harry.

Both disgraced journalists were involved in strategy meetings and commenting on witness statements used in the case.

Johnson offered private investigators cash and book and film deals if they gave evidence on behalf of celebrities, the court was told. He was accused on Wednesday of fishing for potential claimants using his website, Byline Investigates, for which Evans also write.

Green said it was ''extraordinary'' that Johnson persuaded private investigators used by newspapers to give evidence on behalf of the celebrities by promising them ''pretty large sums of money''.

David Brown
Chief News Correspondent at
The Times

^ The Judge will consider the ''reliability'' of these two men paying witnesses.

[wannable]

The Duke of Sussex can go ahead with privacy claims against Associated Newspapers, after a judge's ruling opened the way for a trial.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-67122719?at_link_type=web_link&at_link_id=6C3CF7CE-7FB2-11EE-AA58-3B0A423A1DFE&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_origin=BBCBreaking&at_format=link&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_medium=social&at_campaign_type=owned&at_bbc_team=editorial

[wannable]

Prince Harry security case will mostly be heard behind closed doors at the High Court, judge rules

The article is open from their pay per view scheme.

It's a three day trial Harry vs His Majesty's Home Office to determine if Harry will have or not taxpayer security.  Note: The other item, he paying public security has already been determined, Harry lost that case.

[wannable]

For what it's worth, he will end up paying private security (with taiser) like all the ''other non working royals''.

If he wins, the 'other' working royals that have public security ''when working only'' and the 'other' non working royals will request it too.

[wannable]

The lawyers of Harry said he went airport coronation airport because bodyguards were not being provided in Buckingham after party.

Version 1 Archie birthday is out

[wannable]

No comments? What was said in a court of law, under oath supercedes the couple and their team Sussex soap opera drama version 1.0 that Harry is/was going to go at lightning speed to the Coronation to be back ASAP to his son's birthday.

Nobody is suprised with the versions though. But this one IS under oath.

[wannable]

Matt Wilkinson
@MattSunRoyal
Full story: The UK is my home and I was "forced" to leave, Harry says in High Court security battle

(Although, in their exit statement in January 2020 he and Meghan wrote "we have 'chosen' to make a transition")

The UK is my home and I was forced to leave, Prince Harry says as he wages battle over his security | The Sun

Version 2.0 Forced to leave
Version 1.0 Half in/Half out

The truth: the couple were planning to leave since before the wedding May 2018, source: facts of registrations in the USA, facts of conversations with TV stations and agents to sign tell all contracts.  Let's go ''commercial''.

[wannable]

''It was with great sadness to both of us that my wife and I felt forced to step back from this role and leave the country in 2020''.


^Too much mushroom, drugs, halucination tea, whatever - his very public Version 1.0 They both trashed the ''job'', he saying he was forced to work, behind the scenes, the multiple hats, forced travel to places he didn't want to go. She mocked and played the victim card to what the constitutional monarchy IS.

Blah blah blah.

His real target is IPP status. Period.

[wannable]

THE LAST ABOVE STORY IS H Final plea - closing story to try to pull heart strings and what not/convince the Judge.


Chris Ship
@chrisshipitv

The Duke of Sussex's case against the Home Office over his security arrangements in the UK has just finished.
The judge, Mr Justice Lane, has reserved his decision - which means he goes away and announces it at a future date.

[wannable]

The Sussexsquad is beside themselves. 

Before: with all the muscle 💪🏻 that Harry and Meghan trashing the Constitutional Monarchy, cheering their ''independence' of making fake millions (millions cut in half or less for not complying contracts - that is done done done - no new contracts - it's over).

Today: forget the muscle, it did not exist.  :teehee: The SS is deploying deep state dislike against the very same monarchy they were previously cheering the Sussexes they had left, they don't need them.  They DO need them.

[wannable]

Source: Thanks to Audrey Forbes Hamilton, X who has kept all the original receipts before the Sussexes morphed it all.

[wannable]

[Nightowl]

 Just wonder what he thinks of that so called *freedom flight* right now since he so wants back in the royal family or else that is all LIES made up by his staff.