Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister - DreamTeamDownloads1, FTP Help, Movies, Bollywood, Applications, etc. & Mature Sex Forum, Rapidshare, Filefactory, Freakshare, Rapidgator, Turbobit, & More MULTI Filehosts

Ladybbird · 07-06-23, 05:53

Prince Harry: He is The First Senior Royal to Give Evidence in Historic High Court Trial in Over 130 Years.

Prince Harry Gave Evidence Against The Press -Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) at Londons's High Court

Prince Harry: I Couldn't Trust Anybody Due to Phone Hacking

BBC 7 JUNE 2023

Mirror Group Newspapers (formerly Trinity Mirror, now part of Reach plc), published the Daily Mirror, a pro- Labour tabloid; Sunday Mirror; Sunday People; Scottish Sunday Mail and Scottish Daily Record.

Prince Harry has accused tabloid newspapers of hacking his voicemails when he was a teenager, saying it made him feel he "couldn't trust anybody".

Appearing in court in his case against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) he said he has "experienced hostility from the press" since he was born.

He is the first senior royal to give evidence in court in over 130 years.

MGN's lawyer said he had sympathy for the duke, but denied journalists' actions were "all unlawful".

Prince Harry arrived on Tuesday morning at London's High Court dressed in a dark suit and looking relaxed - dozens of journalists only had a matter of seconds to get their photographs as he made his way swiftly into the building.

In court he was cross-examined by MGN lawyer Andrew Green KC, who became increasingly direct in his challenges as the hearing wore on. The prince grew in confidence after a nervous start.

Mr Green - who has decades of experience and has been described as a "beast in court" - built up his line of questioning, asking in detail about the sourcing of stories, and suggesting they were based on official statements or publicly available information.

Prince Harry's responses were often short, stressing his suspicion that each story was connected with a payment to a private investigator.

In his written statement, issued as he appeared at court, Prince Harry accused the tabloid press of casting members of the Royal Family into roles and creating an "alternative and distorted version of me".

"They then start to edge you towards playing the role or roles that suit them best and which sells as many newspapers as possible, especially if you are the 'spare' to the 'heir'", he said.

"You're then either the 'playboy prince', the 'failure', the 'drop out' or, in my case, the 'thicko', the 'cheat', the 'underage drinker', the 'irresponsible drug taker'..."

The duke also said stories he believed originated from hacking not only caused security concerns, but damaged his relationships.

"I felt that I couldn't trust anybody, which was an awful feeling for me especially at such a young age," he said.

He said numerous papers had reported a rumour that his biological father was former Army officer James Hewitt - a man his mother, Princess Diana, had a relationship with after he was born.

At the time, he said, he was not aware of the timeline. Aged 18 and having lost his mother six years earlier, he said such stories were "hurtful, mean and cruel".

In His Statement, He Also:

Said the thought of Daily Mirror former editor Piers Morgan "and his band of journalists earwigging into my mother's private and sensitive messages" months before her death in Paris in 1997 made him feel "physically sick"

Accused the press of repeatedly trying to break up his relationships, saying the "twisted objective" continues today

Criticised the government and the British press as both being at "rock bottom"

Accused the media of "ganging up to protect each other", and of those in power "turning a blind eye to it as to ensure that it would continue unabated"

Described the press as "the mothership of online trolling", saying people have died as a result of their work

Alleged journalists would illegally obtain information about former girlfriend Chelsy Davy's flights to the UK to see him

His statement is critical of the broader tabloid press, while there are also specific claims levelled against the publisher of the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and The People.

Harry alleges about 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 contained information gathered using unlawful methods, and 33 of these have been selected to be considered in the court case. After being sworn in in court, the duke was initially addressed as "your royal highness" before saying he wanted to be called "Prince Harry".

Early in his cross-examination, Mr Green asked Prince Harry about his "hostility" towards the press, suggesting to the duke that this pre-dated his discovery that the tabloid press were using unlawful methods to gather information about him.

"I've experienced hostility from the press since I was born," Prince Harry responded, also admitting to having his own "long-standing hostility" towards the media.

He was also challenged on why he said in his witness statement he did not want to meet Paul Burrell, his mother's former butler, but wrote in his book Spare that he did.

"I honestly can't remember whether I wanted a meeting or not," he said.

He also claimed that remarks he had made about Mr Burrell to his brother, Prince William, were obtained illegally by MGN from a voicemail he left.

A pattern began to emerge in the courtroom battle, with Mr Green pinning Prince Harry down with questions about specific details - while the duke pushed back with broader scepticism about how newspaper stories were gathered.

Court sketch of Andrew Green KC, the barrister representing MGN cross-examining Prince Harry

---Prince Harry said the media had a "twisted objective" to destroy his relationships

A key strand of MGN's case is that stories were legally reported because they were in the public domain, and Mr Green put it to the duke that some stories written by MGN papers were follow-ups to articles in rival publications.

Prince Harry said journalists were "desperate for anything royal" and "any element of our private lives is interesting to the public".

"Just because there was a story which came out previously doesn't mean there weren't attempts to take the story further," he told the court.

Mr Green said that while there was sympathy for the "extraordinary level of press intrusion" Prince Harry has faced "it does not follow that it was all unlawful activity".

Harry said that journalists had caused a lot of pain and upset, and asked if he was in court to "put a stop to this madness", he replied: "That is my hope."

After several hours of questioning in the witness stand from Mr Green, in the afternoon there was a brief pause in proceedings.

"My mind's gone blank for a moment," Prince Harry said, in response to questioning about an article on his part in a school cadet event.

Queen Victorias’ Infamous Son, King Edward VII.

By appearing at the High Court, the duke has become the first senior royal to give evidence in a court since Edward VII in 1891.

Prince Harry is one of four people suing the publisher, alongside Coronation Street actors Michael Turner - known professionally as Michael Le Vell - and Nikki Sanderson, as well as Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of the comedian Paul Whitehouse.

The claimants allege unlawful methods were used to obtain information for stories and say senior executives must have known about it and failed to stop it, which MGN denies.

Prince Harry will return to continue his evidence on Wednesday.

Prince Harry tells court press have ‘blood on their hands’

Prince Harry blamed tabloids for 'inciting hatred and harassment' in court

Prince Harry slams Piers Morgan and the government in historic High Court trial

Special Programme: Prince Harry in Court

Ladybbird · 07-06-23, 23:34

Prince Harry Emotional in Final Phone-Hacking Court Appearance

Prince Harry Says He is Taking Legal Action to Stop Hate Towards Him and Meghan

BBC 8 JUNE 2023

The Duke of Sussex has told a court he is suing the publisher of the Daily Mirror to stop "absolute intrusion and hate" towards him and his wife.

Prince Harry was giving evidence against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over illegal newsgathering claims, including phone hacking.

He was choked-up as he finished giving evidence for a second day, and said it had been "a lot".

MGN denies it used illegal methods to gather stories about the prince.

At London's High Court, the prince explained he started discussions about possible legal action after a chance-meeting in France in 2018 with David Sherborne, now his barrister.

The prince said before then he had no concerns over any particular newspaper stories due to unlawful activity because it "was all contained in the Palace".

When asked about his discussions with lawyers after that chance meeting with Mr Sherborne, Prince Harry said he had wanted to put a stop to the "absolute intrusion and hate that was coming towards" him and the Duchess of Sussex.

He said he also wanted to "see if there was any way to find a different course of action, rather than relying on the Institution's way".

But in cross-examination, Andrew Green KC, the lawyer representing the publisher of the Mirror, Sunday Mirror and The People, suggested Harry had not found a single story that came from phone hacking.

Harry replied "there is hard evidence to suggest an incredible amount of suspiciousness" over how stories were sourced and he believed burner phones were used "extensively", referring to phones that can be disposed of so no records are kept.

Prince Harry alleges about 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 - from his childhood into early adulthood - contained information gathered using unlawful methods, with a sample of 33 stories written about him being considered by the civil court.

Many of the stories the prince claimed were obtained illegally concerned his relationship with his ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy.

In a 2006 Sunday People article Ms Davy was said to have been "screaming for half an hour" at him on the phone and "blew her top" over his visit to a Spearmint Rhino lap dancing club in Berkshire.

Chelsy Davy and Prince Harry were in an on-off relationship between 2004 and 2010

Asked where he thought the information on her screaming had come from, the prince said: "At this point, knowing that my girlfriend's number was bizarrely in the hands of Mirror journalists, that they probably looked through her call data and saw missed calls, late calls… and managed to put together a story based on that."

"It was very suspicious that they had her number," he added, and he did not believe she would have given the Mirror Group or any journalists her phone number.

The prince told the court he once found a tracking device on Ms Davy's car at a time when the press were reporting on what was described as a "make-or-break" holiday for the couple.

He also highlighted another article in The People in 2007 which reported a "Palace source" saying the couple had been having "monumental" rows and their relationship was "in crisis after a string of bitter bust-ups". Again he said it was "incredibly suspicious" as he had never discussed his relationship with the Palace.

Mr Green responded by saying we are in the "land of total speculation about where this information might have come from".

The couple broke up in 2010 after a six-year on-off relationship. She attended the prince's wedding to Meghan in Windsor in 2018.

The prince was also asked about The People publishing photographs of the prince, a friend Mark Dyer and the late TV presenter Caroline Flack meeting up.

At the time he suspected one of his friends had leaked the details after they were confronted by photographers. In turn this led him and his brother William to stop talking to Mr Dyer for some time afterwards.

However he said: "I now believe the information came from our voicemails… Even those I trusted the most, I ended up doubting."

Asked how he would react if the court concluded that he had never been hacked by any MGN journalist, Harry said that he had been hacked on an "industrial scale" and he would "feel some injustice" if he did not win the trial.

After Prince Harry's evidence concluded, he stayed to see the Daily Mirror's former royal correspondent Jane Kerr give her evidence.

She had been a royal reporter for the newspaper and later royal correspondent for a decade up to 2007 and wrote a number of the articles under scrutiny in the case.

In her written witness statement, she denied voicemail hacking or using private investigators to carry out unlawful information gathering.

Asked about her use of private investigators, Ms Kerr told the court she had "no reason to believe" details for stories had been obtained unlawfully.

"These were people who were well known to the news desk, I did not think there was anything wrong with using them," she said.

Three other people are also bringing claims against MGN in this case - Coronation Street actors Michael Turner, known professionally as Michael Le Vell, and Nikki Sanderson, as well as Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse.

The claimants allege unlawful methods were used to obtain information for stories and say senior executives must have known about it and failed to stop it, which MGN denies.

The publisher has either denied or not admitted each of the claims. MGN also argues that some of the claimants have brought their legal action too late.

Ladybbird · 28-07-23, 03:44

Judge Rules That Prince Harrys' Lawsuit Against The Sun Publisher Can Go to Trial

Prince Harry Set For Court Showdown With The Sun Publisher

BBC 28 JULY 2023

The Duke of Sussex is to take The Sun's publisher to court over claims it used illegal methods to gather information on him.

Prince Harrys' case could go to trial in the High Court next year after a judge ruled on Thursday that parts of his claim can proceed.

While his allegations of some illegal methods will go to trial, a judge dismissed his phone-hacking claims.

News Group Newspapers (NGN) has denied Harry's allegations.

Prince Harry has alleged that journalists and private investigators working for The Sun and now-defunct News of the World used unlawful methods to obtain information about him.

The latest round of the royal's battle with the UK tabloid press revolved around at what point Harry knew enough about the alleged methods used against him in order to sue.

Under the law, claimants have six years after a privacy breach in which to take action.

Lawyers for NGN have argued that he waited too long to bring the claim, and said it should therefore be dismissed.

But the court previously heard Harry claim there was a "secret agreement" between Buckingham Palace and NGN which had prevented him from taking legal action sooner.

In March 2023, Harry disclosed for the first time a supposed deal between royal aides and senior NGN executives, which stipulated any privacy actions against the company should be delayed, and then settled out of court.

He relied on this context to explain why he had not brought his claim years earlier.

Lawyers for NGN have previously disputed the existence of any secret agreement, describing it as "Alice in Wonderland stuff".

Mr Justice Fancourt said Harry's amended case submitted earlier this year - which was reliant on the existence of the "secret agreement" - did not "reach the necessary threshold of plausibility and cogency".

He said emails between the Palace and NGN suggested there was "at some time an understanding" that the Royal Family's claims "would be addressed informally" at a late date, but the "vague and limited" evidence provided by Harry's lawyers did not amount to proof of Harry's specific claims.

From 2012, the judge ruled, Harry was "on notice" that he may have been hacked after finding out about the practice at the News of the World.

The judge said Harry "could easily" have had his lawyers investigate further, at which point a "much fuller picture would have emerged". The judge said the phone-hacking claim was therefore too late.

A spokesperson for NGN called the ruling a "significant victory" for the company.

They said: "The judge, Mr Justice Fancourt, found his claims in relation to the alleged 'secret agreement' were not plausible or credible.

Hugh Grant is also taking legal action against NGN

"It is quite clear there was never any such agreement and it is only the Duke who has ever asserted there was."

But the judge ruled that there should be a trial around other alleged methods used to get information about Harry, identified in the ruling as "blagging of confidential information from third parties, and instructing private investigators to do these or other unlawful acts".

The judge said Harry had a "realistically arguable" case that he did not know enough about any use of the methods back in September 2013, the point at which NGN argue that his six-year window to bring a claim began.

Harry says he did not have enough information to bring a claim until 2018.

Thursday's ruling does not take a position on whether Harry waited too long to bring a valid claim, only that "it is not sufficiently clear at this stage that it was issued too late" and should be decided at trial.

The trial could feature "many other" claimants, including actor Hugh Grant, and is due to start in January 2024, although could run into 2025.

Harrys' legal action against the Sun is one of three major claims he is making against the publishers of British tabloids.

He gave unprecedented testimony in court last month as part of his claim against the Mirror Group, and is also attempting to sue the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday over alleged breaches of privacy.

Ladybbird · 20-12-23, 01:28

Prince Harry Wins Phone Hacking Case -Awarded £140,600 in Damages Asks Metropolitan Police to Investigate as a Criminal Inquiry & Bring Charges

Harry Wanted Respect. Now, With This Court Victory, He’s Earned It

After all the reputational damage the prince has suffered, this was a courageous stand

The Guardian 20 DEC 2023

Prince Harry and Meghan on a visit to Australia.

Whatever else might be said about Prince Harry, he got to pull the sword from the stone. He got his day in court, his longed-for legal vindication, winning phone hacking rulings against the Mirror group.

The hacked-off royal even got to witness arch-enemy Piers Morgans’ head roll into the executioners’ basket (though, characteristically, the former Daily Mirror editor failed to go quietly, accusing Harry and wife Meghan of scheming to bring down the monarchy).

For Harry, there must also be the sense of ethical, almost biblical, restoration, not least of his reputation. You felt it thrumming behind the statement read out by his lawyer outside court, hailing the ruling as a “great day for truth”. He’s been awarded £140,600 in damages. Scotland Yard hasn’t ruled out a criminal inquiry. So, what now for Harry, self-styled “dragon slayer” and would-be reformer of the British media?

Few could deny that Harry has been the most tarnished British prince of the modern era, which is saying something (two words: “Prince” and “Andrew”). First the upbringing in the regal Truman Show of pomp and privilege, and the loss of his mother, Diana (12-year-old Harry walking behind her coffin with his brother, William, in what now registers as globally televised child abuse).

Prince Harry was a victim of phone hacking carried out by publishers of the Daily Mirror and Sunday Mirror newspapers, a High Court judge has ruled.

Fifteen of 33 articles brought by Harry in his legal claim against the newspapers were the product of phone hacking or unlawful information gathering. He has been awarded £140,600 in damages.

Phone hacking by Mirror Group Newspapers was carried out from 1996 to 2011, and was "widespread and habitual" from 1998, a High Court judge has ruled.

The court considered 33 articles about Prince Harry, who was behind the civil case, and ruled 15 of them were written using information that was unlawfully obtained.

In a statement, Prince Harry said the ruling was "vindicating and affirming" - and took aim at senior executives and editors, including Piers Morgan

Prince Harry has urged the Metropolitan Police to investigate bringing charges against individuals at Mirror Group Newspapers as he accused senior editors - including Piers Morgan - of being involved in, or aware of, illegal activities.

The Duke of Sussex accused MGN board directors, legal department and senior editors, making specific reference to Mr Morgan, of lying under oath to Parliament during the Leveson Inquiry and of deceiving the National Stock Exchange.

In a statement read outside the High Court in London by his barrister, David Sherborne, Harry described the ruling as “vindicating and affirming” as he urged further investigations into any allegations of illegal activity.

Prince Harry takes aim at Piers Morgan as judge rules his phone was hacked by The Mirror

Prince Harrys' lawyer reads out statement after judge rules he was victim of phone hacking by Mirror

Ladybbird · 30-01-24, 09:18

Prince Harry Demands New Mirror Hacking Trial 'As Soon as Possible' Unless His Demands For Compensation Are Met

Harry wants trial 'soon as possible' unless group meet compensation demands

MailOnline 30 JAN 2024

Prince Harry is pursuing a second High Court hacking trial against Mirror newspapers, a court heard yesterday.

The Duke of Sussex wants a trial 'as soon as possible' unless the group meets his demands for compensation.

Meanwhile, two former Coronation Street stars who fought alongside Harry at the first trial face a £242,000 legal bill.

Last year the duke became the first royal in over a hundred years to step into the witness box at the High Court.

He was the most high-profile of four claimants accusing Mirror Group Newspapers of hacking them for stories.

After the seven-week trial, Harry was partially successful, and was awarded £140,000 by the judge. In his landmark ruling last month, Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that 15 out of 33 articles had come from hacking.

But he threw out the remaining 17, branding one of them 'hopeless'.

The articles were a 'sample' from 148 Harry had complained about. Now the duke will pursue the remaining 115 in a second trial lasting seven to ten days.

In court last summer, Harry said media intrusion had seriously impacted previous relationships and friendships. After the judge ruled Harry had been the victim of hacking, the duke declared himself a 'dragon slayer' and vowed to continue his crusade against the Press.

The cost hearing was told yesterday that Harry – who had been seeking between £440,000 and £570,000 in damages – and his fellow claimants had racked up legal fees of £2million so far.

Ex-Coronation Street actor Michael Turner had sought £175,000 in damages, and was awarded £31,650.

Both actress Nikki Sanderson, who was also in Coronation Street, and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse, had their claims dismissed because they were made too late.

Ladybbird · 09-02-24, 15:33

Prince Harry Ends Four-Year Legal Battle Against Publisher of The Mirror by Accepting Substantial Sum' in Phone Hacking Case

Prince Harry VOWS to See Press Mission 'To The END', Berates Mouthy, Dishonest Piers Morgan

MailOnline 9 FEB 2024

Prince Harry has ended his four-year legal battle against the publisher of the Mirror by accepting a 'substantial' sum of money...

The High Court was told Mirror Group Newspapers had also agreed to pay all of the Duke of Sussex's costs in last year's hacking trial.

Last year, the duke became the first royal in over a hundred years to step into the witness box at the High Court.

He was the most high-profile of four claimants accusing Mirror Group Newspapers of hacking them for news stories.

After the seven-week trial last summer, Harry was awarded £140,600 by the judge. In his landmark ruling in December, Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that 15 out of 33 articles about Harry had come from hacking.

But he also threw out the remaining 17 articles in the duke's claims, branding one of them 'hopeless'. And those 33 were only a 'sample' from a total of 148 articles Harry had complained about.

A second trial had been mooted to consider the remaining 115 articles that he claimed were from hacking. But today it was announced there had been an out-of-court settlement.

Harry's barrister David Sherborne told Mr Justice Fancourt: 'MGN has accepted the duke's offer.

MGN will pay a substantial additional sum by way of damages, and secondly all of the costs of his claim'. The 'additional sum' was not specified, but will be added to the £140,600.

The legal costs, which the newspaper group will have to pay towards Harry's lawyers, are likely to be substantially higher.

The court heard that, in relation to Harry's three fellow claimants, the newspaper should pay them £2.1million towards their costs. Harry's costs were not revealed in court.

Harry's case at trial was heard alongside similar claims brought by actor Michael Turner, who is known professionally as Michael Le Vell and is most famous for playing Kevin Webster in Coronation Street, actress Nikki Sanderson, and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse.

The claims brought by Ms Sanderson and Ms Wightman were dismissed because they were made too late, despite the judge finding that some of their complaints were proved.

An MGN spokesperson said: 'We are pleased to have reached this agreement, which gives our business further clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago and for which we have apologised.'

Ladybbird · 12-03-24, 21:33

Meghan Markle Scores Legal Victory Against Half Sister Samantha as Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit

A judge dismissed Samantha Markle's defamation suit against her sister Meghan. The judge's decision spares the Duchess of Sussex, 42, from trial which was set to take place in November

BBC 12 MAR 2024

The judge said that Meghan Markles' comments in her Netflix series with Prince Harry and in their interview with Oprah Winfrey were true

Samantha Markles' defamation lawsuit against her sister Meghan has been dismissed because the Duchess of Sussex's statements were 'substantially true'.

Florida Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell said that the case should be dismissed because Samantha 'failed to identify any statements that could support a claim for defamation'.

In a major victory for the Duchess, Judge Honeywell said Meghan's comments in her Netflix series with Prince Harry or their interview with Oprah Winfrey were true.

The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that Samantha will not be able to refile it.

The judge's decision spares Meghan, 42, from an embarrassing trial which was set to take place at the court in Tampa in November.

Samantha, 59, has been seeking at least $75,000 for defamation and defamation by implication for Meghan suggesting to Oprah that she grew up as an only child.

Meghan also said that Samantha only changed her name back to Markle after she began dating Harry.

According to Samantha, Meghan made similar claims in the Netflix series and the allegations subjected her to 'humiliation, shame and hatred on a worldwide scale'.

In her 58-page ruling, Judge Honeywell said that Meghan's statements could not be defamatory because they are 'substantially true based on judicially noticed evidence' or 'not capable of being considered defamatory'.

Samantha had failed to 'plausibly allege that they are defamatory in the first place', the judge said.

The judge noted that Meghan's comments about her childhood was her 'merely opining' that she did not have a close relationship with Samantha, her half sister with whom she shares a father.

Judge Honeywell said that Samatha's claim that Meghan 'implied that (she) was a liar and a fame-seeker', was an 'improper mischaracterization' of what the Duchess said.

Turning to Meghan's statement that Samatha changed her name from Rasmussen, her married name, back to Markle after the Duchess began dating Harry, the judge said that 'the gist was true'.

She wrote: 'That Plaintiff used one last name and then the name Markle soon after reports of Defendant's relationship with Prince Harry were published is substantially true, based on the exhibits in the record, of which the Court has taken judicial notice'.

07-06-23, 05:53	#1
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister Prince Harry: He is The First Senior Royal to Give Evidence in Historic High Court Trial in Over 130 Years. Prince Harry Gave Evidence Against The Press -Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) at Londons's High Court Prince Harry: I Couldn't Trust Anybody Due to Phone Hacking BBC 7 JUNE 2023 Mirror Group Newspapers (formerly Trinity Mirror, now part of Reach plc), published the Daily Mirror, a pro- Labour tabloid; Sunday Mirror; Sunday People; Scottish Sunday Mail and Scottish Daily Record. Prince Harry has accused tabloid newspapers of hacking his voicemails when he was a teenager, saying it made him feel he "couldn't trust anybody". Appearing in court in his case against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) he said he has "experienced hostility from the press" since he was born. He is the first senior royal to give evidence in court in over 130 years. MGN's lawyer said he had sympathy for the duke, but denied journalists' actions were "all unlawful". Prince Harry arrived on Tuesday morning at London's High Court dressed in a dark suit and looking relaxed - dozens of journalists only had a matter of seconds to get their photographs as he made his way swiftly into the building. In court he was cross-examined by MGN lawyer Andrew Green KC, who became increasingly direct in his challenges as the hearing wore on. The prince grew in confidence after a nervous start. Mr Green - who has decades of experience and has been described as a "beast in court" - built up his line of questioning, asking in detail about the sourcing of stories, and suggesting they were based on official statements or publicly available information. Prince Harry's responses were often short, stressing his suspicion that each story was connected with a payment to a private investigator. In his written statement, issued as he appeared at court, Prince Harry accused the tabloid press of casting members of the Royal Family into roles and creating an "alternative and distorted version of me". "They then start to edge you towards playing the role or roles that suit them best and which sells as many newspapers as possible, especially if you are the 'spare' to the 'heir'", he said. "You're then either the 'playboy prince', the 'failure', the 'drop out' or, in my case, the 'thicko', the 'cheat', the 'underage drinker', the 'irresponsible drug taker'..." The duke also said stories he believed originated from hacking not only caused security concerns, but damaged his relationships. "I felt that I couldn't trust anybody, which was an awful feeling for me especially at such a young age," he said. He said numerous papers had reported a rumour that his biological father was former Army officer James Hewitt - a man his mother, Princess Diana, had a relationship with after he was born. At the time, he said, he was not aware of the timeline. Aged 18 and having lost his mother six years earlier, he said such stories were "hurtful, mean and cruel". In His Statement, He Also: Said the thought of Daily Mirror former editor Piers Morgan "and his band of journalists earwigging into my mother's private and sensitive messages" months before her death in Paris in 1997 made him feel "physically sick" Accused the press of repeatedly trying to break up his relationships, saying the "twisted objective" continues today Criticised the government and the British press as both being at "rock bottom" Accused the media of "ganging up to protect each other", and of those in power "turning a blind eye to it as to ensure that it would continue unabated" Described the press as "the mothership of online trolling", saying people have died as a result of their work Alleged journalists would illegally obtain information about former girlfriend Chelsy Davy's flights to the UK to see him His statement is critical of the broader tabloid press, while there are also specific claims levelled against the publisher of the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and The People. Harry alleges about 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 contained information gathered using unlawful methods, and 33 of these have been selected to be considered in the court case. After being sworn in in court, the duke was initially addressed as "your royal highness" before saying he wanted to be called "Prince Harry". Early in his cross-examination, Mr Green asked Prince Harry about his "hostility" towards the press, suggesting to the duke that this pre-dated his discovery that the tabloid press were using unlawful methods to gather information about him. "I've experienced hostility from the press since I was born," Prince Harry responded, also admitting to having his own "long-standing hostility" towards the media. He was also challenged on why he said in his witness statement he did not want to meet Paul Burrell, his mother's former butler, but wrote in his book Spare that he did. "I honestly can't remember whether I wanted a meeting or not," he said. He also claimed that remarks he had made about Mr Burrell to his brother, Prince William, were obtained illegally by MGN from a voicemail he left. A pattern began to emerge in the courtroom battle, with Mr Green pinning Prince Harry down with questions about specific details - while the duke pushed back with broader scepticism about how newspaper stories were gathered. Court sketch of Andrew Green KC, the barrister representing MGN cross-examining Prince Harry ---Prince Harry said the media had a "twisted objective" to destroy his relationships A key strand of MGN's case is that stories were legally reported because they were in the public domain, and Mr Green put it to the duke that some stories written by MGN papers were follow-ups to articles in rival publications. Prince Harry said journalists were "desperate for anything royal" and "any element of our private lives is interesting to the public". "Just because there was a story which came out previously doesn't mean there weren't attempts to take the story further," he told the court. Mr Green said that while there was sympathy for the "extraordinary level of press intrusion" Prince Harry has faced "it does not follow that it was all unlawful activity". Harry said that journalists had caused a lot of pain and upset, and asked if he was in court to "put a stop to this madness", he replied: "That is my hope." After several hours of questioning in the witness stand from Mr Green, in the afternoon there was a brief pause in proceedings. "My mind's gone blank for a moment," Prince Harry said, in response to questioning about an article on his part in a school cadet event. Queen Victorias’ Infamous Son, King Edward VII. By appearing at the High Court, the duke has become the first senior royal to give evidence in a court since Edward VII in 1891. Prince Harry is one of four people suing the publisher, alongside Coronation Street actors Michael Turner - known professionally as Michael Le Vell - and Nikki Sanderson, as well as Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of the comedian Paul Whitehouse. The claimants allege unlawful methods were used to obtain information for stories and say senior executives must have known about it and failed to stop it, which MGN denies. *Prince Harry will return to continue his evidence on Wednesday.* Prince Harry tells court press have ‘blood on their hands’ Prince Harry blamed tabloids for 'inciting hatred and harassment' in court Prince Harry slams Piers Morgan and the government in historic High Court trial Special Programme: Prince Harry in Court __________________ PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL ..................*SHARKS are Closing in on TRUMP*.......................... *TRUMP WARNS; 'There'll Be a Bloodbath* If I Don't Get Elected'..MAGA - MyAssGotArrested...IT's COMING** PLEASE HELP THIS SITE..Click DONATE & Thanks to ALL Members of ... 1.. THIS SITE IS MORE THAN JUST WAREZ...& TO STOP SPAM-IF YOU WANT TO POST, YOUR FIRST POST MUST BE IN WELCOMES

07-06-23, 23:34	#2
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	re: Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister Prince Harry Emotional in Final Phone-Hacking Court Appearance Prince Harry Says He is Taking Legal Action to Stop Hate Towards Him and Meghan BBC 8 JUNE 2023 The Duke of Sussex has told a court he is suing the publisher of the Daily Mirror to stop "absolute intrusion and hate" towards him and his wife. Prince Harry was giving evidence against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over illegal newsgathering claims, including phone hacking. He was choked-up as he finished giving evidence for a second day, and said it had been "a lot". MGN denies it used illegal methods to gather stories about the prince. At London's High Court, the prince explained he started discussions about possible legal action after a chance-meeting in France in 2018 with David Sherborne, now his barrister. The prince said before then he had no concerns over any particular newspaper stories due to unlawful activity because it "was all contained in the Palace". When asked about his discussions with lawyers after that chance meeting with Mr Sherborne, Prince Harry said he had wanted to put a stop to the "absolute intrusion and hate that was coming towards" him and the Duchess of Sussex. He said he also wanted to "see if there was any way to find a different course of action, rather than relying on the Institution's way". But in cross-examination, Andrew Green KC, the lawyer representing the publisher of the Mirror, Sunday Mirror and The People, suggested Harry had not found a single story that came from phone hacking. Harry replied "there is hard evidence to suggest an incredible amount of suspiciousness" over how stories were sourced and he believed burner phones were used "extensively", referring to phones that can be disposed of so no records are kept. Prince Harry alleges about 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 - from his childhood into early adulthood - contained information gathered using unlawful methods, with a sample of 33 stories written about him being considered by the civil court. Many of the stories the prince claimed were obtained illegally concerned his relationship with his ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy. In a 2006 Sunday People article Ms Davy was said to have been "screaming for half an hour" at him on the phone and "blew her top" over his visit to a Spearmint Rhino lap dancing club in Berkshire. Chelsy Davy and Prince Harry were in an on-off relationship between 2004 and 2010 Asked where he thought the information on her screaming had come from, the prince said: "At this point, knowing that my girlfriend's number was bizarrely in the hands of Mirror journalists, that they probably looked through her call data and saw missed calls, late calls… and managed to put together a story based on that." "It was very suspicious that they had her number," he added, and he did not believe she would have given the Mirror Group or any journalists her phone number. The prince told the court he once found a tracking device on Ms Davy's car at a time when the press were reporting on what was described as a "make-or-break" holiday for the couple. He also highlighted another article in The People in 2007 which reported a "Palace source" saying the couple had been having "monumental" rows and their relationship was "in crisis after a string of bitter bust-ups". Again he said it was "incredibly suspicious" as he had never discussed his relationship with the Palace. Mr Green responded by saying we are in the "land of total speculation about where this information might have come from". The couple broke up in 2010 after a six-year on-off relationship. She attended the prince's wedding to Meghan in Windsor in 2018. The prince was also asked about The People publishing photographs of the prince, a friend Mark Dyer and the late TV presenter Caroline Flack meeting up. At the time he suspected one of his friends had leaked the details after they were confronted by photographers. In turn this led him and his brother William to stop talking to Mr Dyer for some time afterwards. However he said: "I now believe the information came from our voicemails… Even those I trusted the most, I ended up doubting." Asked how he would react if the court concluded that he had never been hacked by any MGN journalist, Harry said that he had been hacked on an "industrial scale" and he would "feel some injustice" if he did not win the trial. After Prince Harry's evidence concluded, he stayed to see the Daily Mirror's former royal correspondent Jane Kerr give her evidence. She had been a royal reporter for the newspaper and later royal correspondent for a decade up to 2007 and wrote a number of the articles under scrutiny in the case. In her written witness statement, she denied voicemail hacking or using private investigators to carry out unlawful information gathering. Asked about her use of private investigators, Ms Kerr told the court she had "no reason to believe" details for stories had been obtained unlawfully. "These were people who were well known to the news desk, I did not think there was anything wrong with using them," she said. Three other people are also bringing claims against MGN in this case - Coronation Street actors Michael Turner, known professionally as Michael Le Vell, and Nikki Sanderson, as well as Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse. The claimants allege unlawful methods were used to obtain information for stories and say senior executives must have known about it and failed to stop it, which MGN denies. The publisher has either denied or not admitted each of the claims. MGN also argues that some of the claimants have brought their legal action too late. __________________ PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL ..................*SHARKS are Closing in on TRUMP*.......................... *TRUMP WARNS; 'There'll Be a Bloodbath* If I Don't Get Elected'..MAGA - MyAssGotArrested...IT's COMING** PLEASE HELP THIS SITE..Click DONATE & Thanks to ALL Members of ... 1.. THIS SITE IS MORE THAN JUST WAREZ...& TO STOP SPAM-IF YOU WANT TO POST, YOUR FIRST POST MUST BE IN WELCOMES

28-07-23, 03:44	#3
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	re: Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister Judge Rules That Prince Harrys' Lawsuit Against The Sun Publisher Can Go to Trial Prince Harry Set For Court Showdown With The Sun Publisher BBC 28 JULY 2023 The Duke of Sussex is to take The Sun's publisher to court over claims it used illegal methods to gather information on him. Prince Harrys' case could go to trial in the High Court next year after a judge ruled on Thursday that parts of his claim can proceed. While his allegations of some illegal methods will go to trial, a judge dismissed his phone-hacking claims. News Group Newspapers (NGN) has denied Harry's allegations. Prince Harry has alleged that journalists and private investigators working for The Sun and now-defunct News of the World used unlawful methods to obtain information about him. The latest round of the royal's battle with the UK tabloid press revolved around at what point Harry knew enough about the alleged methods used against him in order to sue. Under the law, claimants have six years after a privacy breach in which to take action. Lawyers for NGN have argued that he waited too long to bring the claim, and said it should therefore be dismissed. But the court previously heard Harry claim there was a "secret agreement" between Buckingham Palace and NGN which had prevented him from taking legal action sooner. In March 2023, Harry disclosed for the first time a supposed deal between royal aides and senior NGN executives, which stipulated any privacy actions against the company should be delayed, and then settled out of court. He relied on this context to explain why he had not brought his claim years earlier. Lawyers for NGN have previously disputed the existence of any secret agreement, describing it as "Alice in Wonderland stuff". Mr Justice Fancourt said Harry's amended case submitted earlier this year - which was reliant on the existence of the "secret agreement" - did not "reach the necessary threshold of plausibility and cogency". He said emails between the Palace and NGN suggested there was "at some time an understanding" that the Royal Family's claims "would be addressed informally" at a late date, but the "vague and limited" evidence provided by Harry's lawyers did not amount to proof of Harry's specific claims. From 2012, the judge ruled, Harry was "on notice" that he may have been hacked after finding out about the practice at the News of the World. The judge said Harry "could easily" have had his lawyers investigate further, at which point a "much fuller picture would have emerged". The judge said the phone-hacking claim was therefore too late. A spokesperson for NGN called the ruling a "significant victory" for the company. They said: "The judge, Mr Justice Fancourt, found his claims in relation to the alleged 'secret agreement' were not plausible or credible. Hugh Grant is also taking legal action against NGN "It is quite clear there was never any such agreement and it is only the Duke who has ever asserted there was." But the judge ruled that there should be a trial around other alleged methods used to get information about Harry, identified in the ruling as "blagging of confidential information from third parties, and instructing private investigators to do these or other unlawful acts". The judge said Harry had a "realistically arguable" case that he did not know enough about any use of the methods back in September 2013, the point at which NGN argue that his six-year window to bring a claim began. Harry says he did not have enough information to bring a claim until 2018. Thursday's ruling does not take a position on whether Harry waited too long to bring a valid claim, only that "it is not sufficiently clear at this stage that it was issued too late" and should be decided at trial. The trial could feature "many other" claimants, including actor Hugh Grant, and is due to start in January 2024, although could run into 2025. Harrys' legal action against the Sun is one of three major claims he is making against the publishers of British tabloids. He gave unprecedented testimony in court last month as part of his claim against the Mirror Group, and is also attempting to sue the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday over alleged breaches of privacy. __________________ PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL ..................*SHARKS are Closing in on TRUMP*.......................... *TRUMP WARNS; 'There'll Be a Bloodbath* If I Don't Get Elected'..MAGA - MyAssGotArrested...IT's COMING** PLEASE HELP THIS SITE..Click DONATE & Thanks to ALL Members of ... 1.. THIS SITE IS MORE THAN JUST WAREZ...& TO STOP SPAM-IF YOU WANT TO POST, YOUR FIRST POST MUST BE IN WELCOMES

20-12-23, 01:28	#4
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	re: Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister Prince Harry Wins Phone Hacking Case -Awarded £140,600 in Damages Asks Metropolitan Police to Investigate as a Criminal Inquiry & Bring Charges Harry Wanted Respect. Now, With This Court Victory, He’s Earned It After all the reputational damage the prince has suffered, this was a courageous stand The Guardian 20 DEC 2023 Prince Harry and Meghan on a visit to Australia. Whatever else might be said about Prince Harry, he got to pull the sword from the stone. He got his day in court, his longed-for legal vindication, winning phone hacking rulings against the Mirror group. The hacked-off royal even got to witness arch-enemy Piers Morgans’ head roll into the executioners’ basket (though, characteristically, the former Daily Mirror editor failed to go quietly, accusing Harry and wife Meghan of scheming to bring down the monarchy). For Harry, there must also be the sense of ethical, almost biblical, restoration, not least of his reputation. You felt it thrumming behind the statement read out by his lawyer outside court, hailing the ruling as a “great day for truth”. He’s been awarded £140,600 in damages. Scotland Yard hasn’t ruled out a criminal inquiry. So, what now for Harry, self-styled “dragon slayer” and would-be reformer of the British media? Few could deny that Harry has been the most tarnished British prince of the modern era, which is saying something (two words: “Prince” and “Andrew”). First the upbringing in the regal Truman Show of pomp and privilege, and the loss of his mother, Diana (12-year-old Harry walking behind her coffin with his brother, William, in what now registers as globally televised child abuse). Prince Harry was a victim of phone hacking carried out by publishers of the Daily Mirror and Sunday Mirror newspapers, a High Court judge has ruled. Fifteen of 33 articles brought by Harry in his legal claim against the newspapers were the product of phone hacking or unlawful information gathering. He has been awarded £140,600 in damages. Phone hacking by Mirror Group Newspapers was carried out from 1996 to 2011, and was "widespread and habitual" from 1998, a High Court judge has ruled. The court considered 33 articles about Prince Harry, who was behind the civil case, and ruled 15 of them were written using information that was unlawfully obtained. In a statement, Prince Harry said the ruling was "vindicating and affirming" - and took aim at senior executives and editors, including Piers Morgan Prince Harry has urged the Metropolitan Police to investigate bringing charges against individuals at Mirror Group Newspapers as he accused senior editors - including Piers Morgan - of being involved in, or aware of, illegal activities. The Duke of Sussex accused MGN board directors, legal department and senior editors, making specific reference to Mr Morgan, of lying under oath to Parliament during the Leveson Inquiry and of deceiving the National Stock Exchange. In a statement read outside the High Court in London by his barrister, David Sherborne, Harry described the ruling as “vindicating and affirming” as he urged further investigations into any allegations of illegal activity. Prince Harry takes aim at Piers Morgan as judge rules his phone was hacked by The Mirror Prince Harrys' lawyer reads out statement after judge rules he was victim of phone hacking by Mirror __________________ PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL ..................*SHARKS are Closing in on TRUMP*.......................... *TRUMP WARNS; 'There'll Be a Bloodbath* If I Don't Get Elected'..MAGA - MyAssGotArrested...IT's COMING** PLEASE HELP THIS SITE..Click DONATE & Thanks to ALL Members of ... 1.. THIS SITE IS MORE THAN JUST WAREZ...& TO STOP SPAM-IF YOU WANT TO POST, YOUR FIRST POST MUST BE IN WELCOMES

30-01-24, 09:18	#5
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	re: Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister Prince Harry Demands New Mirror Hacking Trial 'As Soon as Possible' Unless His Demands For Compensation Are Met Harry wants trial 'soon as possible' unless group meet compensation demands MailOnline 30 JAN 2024 Prince Harry is pursuing a second High Court hacking trial against Mirror newspapers, a court heard yesterday. The Duke of Sussex wants a trial 'as soon as possible' unless the group meets his demands for compensation. Meanwhile, two former Coronation Street stars who fought alongside Harry at the first trial face a £242,000 legal bill. Last year the duke became the first royal in over a hundred years to step into the witness box at the High Court. He was the most high-profile of four claimants accusing Mirror Group Newspapers of hacking them for stories. After the seven-week trial, Harry was partially successful, and was awarded £140,000 by the judge. In his landmark ruling last month, Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that 15 out of 33 articles had come from hacking. But he threw out the remaining 17, branding one of them 'hopeless'. The articles were a 'sample' from 148 Harry had complained about. Now the duke will pursue the remaining 115 in a second trial lasting seven to ten days. In court last summer, Harry said media intrusion had seriously impacted previous relationships and friendships. After the judge ruled Harry had been the victim of hacking, the duke declared himself a 'dragon slayer' and vowed to continue his crusade against the Press. *The cost hearing was told yesterday that Harry – who had been seeking between £440,000 and £570,000 in damages – and his fellow claimants had racked up legal fees of £2million so far.* Ex-Coronation Street actor Michael Turner had sought £175,000 in damages, and was awarded £31,650. Both actress Nikki Sanderson, who was also in Coronation Street, and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse, had their claims dismissed because they were made too late.

09-02-24, 15:33	#6
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	Re: Prince Harry WINS in Phone Hacking Case -Mirror Publisher MUST Pay Substantial Su Prince Harry Ends Four-Year Legal Battle Against Publisher of The Mirror by Accepting Substantial Sum' in Phone Hacking Case Prince Harry VOWS to See Press Mission 'To The END', Berates Mouthy, Dishonest Piers Morgan MailOnline 9 FEB 2024 Prince Harry has ended his four-year legal battle against the publisher of the Mirror by accepting a 'substantial' sum of money... The High Court was told Mirror Group Newspapers had also agreed to pay all of the Duke of Sussex's costs in last year's hacking trial. Last year, the duke became the first royal in over a hundred years to step into the witness box at the High Court. He was the most high-profile of four claimants accusing Mirror Group Newspapers of hacking them for news stories. After the seven-week trial last summer, Harry was awarded £140,600 by the judge. In his landmark ruling in December, Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that 15 out of 33 articles about Harry had come from hacking. But he also threw out the remaining 17 articles in the duke's claims, branding one of them 'hopeless'. And those 33 were only a 'sample' from a total of 148 articles Harry had complained about. A second trial had been mooted to consider the remaining 115 articles that he claimed were from hacking. But today it was announced there had been an out-of-court settlement. Harry's barrister David Sherborne told Mr Justice Fancourt: 'MGN has accepted the duke's offer. MGN will pay a substantial additional sum by way of damages, and secondly all of the costs of his claim'. The 'additional sum' was not specified, but will be added to the £140,600. The legal costs, which the newspaper group will have to pay towards Harry's lawyers, are likely to be substantially higher. The court heard that, in relation to Harry's three fellow claimants, the newspaper should pay them £2.1million towards their costs. Harry's costs were not revealed in court. Harry's case at trial was heard alongside similar claims brought by actor Michael Turner, who is known professionally as Michael Le Vell and is most famous for playing Kevin Webster in Coronation Street, actress Nikki Sanderson, and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse. The claims brought by Ms Sanderson and Ms Wightman were dismissed because they were made too late, despite the judge finding that some of their complaints were proved. An MGN spokesperson said: 'We are pleased to have reached this agreement, which gives our business further clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago and for which we have apologised.'

12-03-24, 21:33	#7
Ladybbird Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 47,647 Thanks: 27,646 Thanked 14,458 Times in 10,262 Posts Awards Showcase Total Awards: 8	Re: Florida Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit by Meghans' Nasty Sister Meghan Markle Scores Legal Victory Against Half Sister Samantha as Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit A judge dismissed Samantha Markle's defamation suit against her sister Meghan. The judge's decision spares the Duchess of Sussex, 42, from trial which was set to take place in November BBC 12 MAR 2024 The judge said that Meghan Markles' comments in her Netflix series with Prince Harry and in their interview with Oprah Winfrey were true Samantha Markles' defamation lawsuit against her sister Meghan has been dismissed because the Duchess of Sussex's statements were 'substantially true'. Florida Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell said that the case should be dismissed because Samantha 'failed to identify any statements that could support a claim for defamation'. In a major victory for the Duchess, Judge Honeywell said Meghan's comments in her Netflix series with Prince Harry or their interview with Oprah Winfrey were true. The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that Samantha will not be able to refile it. The judge's decision spares Meghan, 42, from an embarrassing trial which was set to take place at the court in Tampa in November. Samantha, 59, has been seeking at least $75,000 for defamation and defamation by implication for Meghan suggesting to Oprah that she grew up as an only child. Meghan also said that Samantha only changed her name back to Markle after she began dating Harry. According to Samantha, Meghan made similar claims in the Netflix series and the allegations subjected her to 'humiliation, shame and hatred on a worldwide scale'. In her 58-page ruling, Judge Honeywell said that Meghan's statements could not be defamatory because they are 'substantially true based on judicially noticed evidence' or 'not capable of being considered defamatory'. Samantha had failed to 'plausibly allege that they are defamatory in the first place', the judge said. The judge noted that Meghan's comments about her childhood was her 'merely opining' that she did not have a close relationship with Samantha, her half sister with whom she shares a father. Judge Honeywell said that Samatha's claim that Meghan 'implied that (she) was a liar and a fame-seeker', was an 'improper mischaracterization' of what the Duchess said. Turning to Meghan's statement that Samatha changed her name from Rasmussen, her married name, back to Markle after the Duchess began dating Harry, the judge said that 'the gist was true'. She wrote: 'That Plaintiff used one last name and then the name Markle soon after reports of Defendant's relationship with Prince Harry were published is substantially true, based on the exhibits in the record, of which the Court has taken judicial notice'.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)