In a dramatic conclusion to his testimony at London’s High Court, Prince Harry delivered an emotionally charged condemnation of Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), accusing the publisher of creating unbearable conditions for his wife Meghan Markle. The Duke of Sussex, visibly fighting back tears, characterized his legal battle against the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday publisher as “a horrible experience” during Wednesday’s proceedings.
The nine-week trial represents the culmination of Harry’s sustained campaign against certain British media outlets, marking his third and final legal action against newspaper publishers. He stands alongside six co-claimants—including music legend Elton John and actors Liz Hurley and Sadie Frost—in alleging systematic privacy violations and unlawful information gathering by the tabloids.
“Having to sit here and go through this all over again while they claim I don’t have any right to privacy is disgusting,” Harry stated from the witness box after several hours of testimony. “The worst part is that by taking a stand against them, they continue to come after me. They’ve made my wife’s life an absolute misery.”
The case revisits the prince’s long-standing grievances with media intrusion, which he has directly linked to the 1997 death of his mother, Princess Diana, who perished in a Paris car crash while evading paparazzi. Harry and Meghan’s 2020 departure from royal duties and subsequent relocation to California occurred amid what they described as relentless negative coverage and family tensions exacerbated by media scrutiny.
In his witness statement, Harry emphasized that the lawsuit extends beyond personal grievances, describing it as a mission “for the greater good” that addresses “thousands of people whose lives were invaded because of greed.” He detailed how press coverage of his former girlfriend Chelsy Davy constituted “full blown stalking” and created an atmosphere of “distrust” among his circle.
The claimants’ legal team opened proceedings by promising to demonstrate “clear and systematic use of unlawful gathering of information” at ANL, alleging the publisher employed private investigators implicated in previous phone-hacking scandals. These accusations span a 25-year period from 1993 to 2018 in some instances.
ANL has vigorously denied all allegations, dismissing them as “lurid” and “preposterous” in court filings. The publisher’s lead attorney contends that evidence will prove legitimate sourcing of stories and characterized the claims regarding private investigators as “clutching at straws in the wind.”
The trial continues as one of the most significant media privacy cases in recent British legal history, with potential implications for press regulation and celebrity privacy rights in the digital age.