Not Looking Good For Harry

[retrocop]

The Mirror Groups brief has given a pretty damning closing down address to the court re Harry's so called evidence. Although the Mirror group are not exactly whiter than white I hope they get this chucked out and Harry is taken to the cleaners. Mostly speculation and no real hard evidence

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/duke-sussex-phone-hacking-claim-173430410.html

[Barsel]

I believe Paul Burrell is going to sue Harry for defamation because of what he said about him. Hope he does.

[retrocop]

So do I. Might cure Harry of his litigation disease.

[Peter Pedant]

few points on procedure
These are clsoing speeches
and it is without a jury
The news of the screws lawyer, is without doubt "advocating" - and that is for juries. judges dont like being advocated at. More law less jaw

Harry if you recall - answered - you will have to ask my lawyer - as if they knew what it was and he didnt

and yes - they have admitted one, I think so the lawyer said this is worth £500 no more. I imagine they have " paid £500 into court" which means that if it is that or less, all costs are paid by Harry

Barsel he says, doesnt follow my points:
you cant sue for statements made in court.
short answer

longish answer - a case shall not beget a case ( judge Judy) - exception GMC testimony, but remember that is quasi legal and not bound by its own precedent, even tho it is a court under the courts act 1981. ( ha follow that one!)
In London, it is interest rei publicae, sit finis ad litem
( it is in the interest of the republic that there is ( be) a n end to litigation)
and so he CAN'T sue for deffo ( er for deffo) and he said - he wished to take it further.

[smurfchops]

Sick and tired of Harry and his legal woes. It seems USA is tiring of them both as well. What will they do next I wonder? Fade into the distance hopefully.

[naomi24]

I suspect the time is swift approaching when he's going to have to get a job.

[Peter Pedant]

now he said, PP drones on, the Law society ( in whatever form it is now) is the chosen on by Burrell - and I am not sure they take complaints about fact ( 'he lied')

The 'witness' crimes are perjury and perverting the course of justice. I think you have to show intention of deceive, and Harry's defence wd be - "ask my lawyers haw haw haw" - or "intend to deceive? I am a royal durr and dont fink anything"

And Burrell is right - he was indicted for selling Diana's fings and after intervention by the Queen no less, was acquitted.

Burrell has asked harry's lawyers what evidence there is, but that is not the game......Burrell has to show himsself, that it is untrue....

[Chairman2001]

Of course there's no real hard evidence - The Mirror aren't going to leave that lying around.

There's a lot of anti-Harry spite in this forum. Jealousy maybe.

[Peter Pedant]

Of course there's no real hard evidence - The Mirror aren't going to leave that lying around.

same argument for the death of Diana and the obvious involvement of MI5 and the Duke of Edinburgh

oh come on there is no evidence of any of that

yes there yo are! If there was a shred of evidence, then it cdnt be either ! Ha case proven!

[retrocop]

//There's a lot of anti-Harry spite in this forum. Jealousy maybe.//

The only spite I have seen comes from Harry himself. I am certainly not jealous of Harry's seemingly troubled imagination, self pity and woes

[smurfchops]

Why would anyone be jealous of Harry, especially being married to her!

[Barsel]

PP. PLEASE NOTE, I AM NOT A MAN.

//Barsel he says, doesnt follow my points://

[bazwillrun]

^

why the caps ?...

[youngmafbog]

This man child needs putting in his place. Been pampered for too long and doesnt live in the real world.

Who goes to Court with no evidence and states they will be disappointed if they dont win. He is a joke.

[Barsel]

bazwillrun, because I'm fed y up with people thinking I'm a man, so I thought if I shout it, people might take note.

[choux]

People should realise they are responsible for their actions whether spoken, written or acted. They should also realise the media attention they obviously crave can work for and against them, a lot depends on how the media wish to manipulate the public's perception.

Nobody likes constant whingeing, so having a positive attitude to work for the benefit of others may be a better course to follow than a self-pitying one.

I am beginning to see a parallel between the Strawbridges of Chateau fame and H & M - when you have bitten the hand that feeds you seek another pronto, though I would add the former couple were talented.

I really have few thoughts on this case other than to suspect Harry will rue the precious days he has spent in the UK in the last year - he has few days left before he as to pay tax here, now that would hurt, I am sure.

Meanwhile, the sun will rise tomorrow...

[andy-hughes]

Harry is extremely naive.

He really believes that because, in his perception, he has had, and continues to have a really valuable time, that the world will sympathise and be on his side.

He fails to realise that sympathy is seriously diluted by the simple fact that he has the word 'Prince' in front of his name, with all that comes with it.

Add to the fact that no-one in history has won a battle with the media, and far more deserving causes than he have tried, and failed.

And finally, moaning has its tolerance limits for everyone, and his have been reached, and are being exceeded on a daily basis.

The novelty of his 'truth' has worn off, the world is moving on.

Bye Harry, it's been real ...

[naomi24]

I don’t think the title ‘Prince’ in front of his name has seriously diluted sympathy for him. I think a lot of people had a lot of sympathy for him before he and his wife trashed his family with their version of the ‘truth’. They now agree with the late queen who said, diplomatically, ‘recollections may vary’. They certainly may. We’ve heard them and read them varying.

[andy-hughes]

William, who has probably been more hacked than Harry on his wildest dreams, has learned the vital lesson - don't engage, don't give ammunition, don't feed the trolls.

Harry - watch and learn.

[douglas9401]

He's the Princess Margaret of the modern age but without the charm. :-)

[andy-hughes]

douglas - // He's the Princess Margaret of the modern age but without the charm. //

I commend you to read Craig Brown's excellent book about Princess Margaret - whatever other attributes she possessed, charm was absolutely not one of them!!