Prince Harry the 'Hot Head' Blocked From Phone Hacking Evidence—Filing

Prince Harry suggested he was blocked from evidence of tabloid phone hacking, including during the "vulnerable years" after Princess Diana's death, because he was viewed as a "hot head."

The Duke of Sussex is suing Rupert Murdoch's media empire for phone hacking and other illegal practices he says he was targeted with by The Sun and News of the World between 1994 and 2016.

However, the case, at the High Court in London, also offers an insight into how Harry was perceived internally within the royal family, including before he met his wife Meghan Markle.

He suggests evidence he was a phone hacking victim was hidden from him because it "would have infuriated me and I would have insisted that I be allowed to take action."

The dynamic is interesting in light of Harry's account, in his 2021 Apple TV docu-series The Me You Can't See, that he pleaded with his family for help dealing with media hostility towards Meghan but was met with "total silence or total neglect."

His latest account suggests an ongoing perception within the palace that his explosive feelings about the press ought to be contained, as far back as the years before 2013. This substantially pre-dated his relationship with Meghan.

In a witness statement to the High Court in London released on April 25 and seen by Newsweek, Harry said: "In those days, I may have been considered to be something of a 'hot head' and therefore that may explain why I wasn't consulted and why I wasn't shown any of the disclosure.

"However, I just wasn't. No doubt the extent of the disclosure (which I only saw for the first time after I commenced my claim on 27 September 2019) would have infuriated me and I would have insisted that I be allowed to take action, especially given my extremely difficult relationship with the press at that time."

News Group Newspapers argues Harry's allegations have been filed too late as there is a six-year cut off for phone hacking claims and he was named as a victim of the News of the World as far back as 2006.

Harry's lawyers argue he only became clear he might have a claim after 2013, six years before he filed his lawsuit in September 2019.

He argues there was a "secret agreement" between the palace and the Murdoch empire that they would pay compensation and issue an apology but only after phone hacking litigations had all been wrapped up.

The deal, according to the duke's court filings, was designed to keep embarrassing private information about the royals out of the courts and added: "I was deliberately kept out of the loop."

Harry risked further exposing his rift with Prince William by revealing his brother had reached an out of court settlement with the publisher for "a very large sum of money in 2020."

And in a detail that may raise an eyebrow in his father's office, he suggested the palace wanted the agreement because they were still scarred by King Charles III's experience of the "tampon-gate" scandal, in which details of a private intimate phone call with Queen Camilla was published in the press. At the time, he was still married to Princess Diana.

"The institution was incredibly nervous about this," Harry said, "and wanted to avoid at all costs the sort of reputational damage that it had suffered in 1993 when The Sun and another tabloid had unlawfully obtained and published details of an intimate telephone conversation that took place between my father and step-mother in 1989, while he was still married to my mother."

And he brought his father into the case again when he revealed the king instructed him to drop the case due to "a specific long term strategy to keep the media (including NGN) onside in order to smooth the way for my stepmother (and father) to be accepted by the British public as Queen Consort (and King respectively) when the time came."

"Indeed," he continued, "when I did actually issue my hacking claims against both MGN [Mirror Group Newspapers] and NGN in October 2019, I was summoned to Buckingham Palace and specifically told to drop the legal actions because they have an 'effect on all the family.'

"This was a direct request (or rather demand) from my father, Edward Young and my father's Private Secretary, Clive Alderton."

For Harry, the issue is clearly bound up with his family's response to media hostility towards Meghan as he says he launched the cases so she would not be alone in her own action against The Mail on Sunday over a private letter to her father.

"Given the strain on her mental state at this stage (which is well documented)," he said, "I did not want her to face a hugely stressful legal case (and the inevitable media scrutiny that comes with it) on her own and I therefore began to think about how I could bring my phone hacking claim against NGN following my frustration at the events of the previous two years."

Harry also cited stories published by The Sun in 2016 stating he bombarded Meghan with text messages as "proof that such unlawful activity isn't as 'historic' as NGN claims."

The payment to William was made after Harry had already filed his lawsuit and promoted it using a broadside at the British media, a step that William did not take.

Harry's court filing stated: "As explained above, the only cause of action that [Prince Harry] was aware of prior to the Relevant Date of 27 September 2013 was the interception of a single voicemail left for him by his brother at the beginning of April 2006 (where [Prince William] pretended to be [Prince Harry's] girlfriend, Chelsy Davy)."

A 2019 filing by Harry's team said that during the message William put on a South African accent to impersonate Davy and jokingly tell him off for going to a lap dancing bar.

The News of the World's article quoted William saying: "It's Chelsy. How could you? I see you had a lovely time without me. But I miss you so much, you big ginger, and I want you to know I love you."

Harry's lawyers said in their latest filing: "[Prince Harry] explains the impact of the Unlawful Acts, and how he feels disgusted, outraged, and infuriated by them and by the journalists involved.

"He feels that these acts were a complete abuse of power, with no public interest justification. [Prince Harry] and his brother were subjected to constant surveillance, and his mother's distrust in her protection officers was fuelled by such activities.

"The discovery of being tracked, bugged, and hacked for profit left [Prince Harry] feeling betrayed and appalled."

The filing added that "his privacy was constantly violated and his safety jeopardised" and he "feels sick knowing that these actions were conducted unlawfully."

It accused journalists of "appalling violations" from "a young age and through his vulnerable years in the wake of the death of his late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales."

The allegations were made during the first of a three-day hearing into an application by News Group Newspapers to have the case thrown out. The hearing continues.

Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent for Newsweek, based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.

Update 04/25/23, 12:29 p.m. ET: This article was updated with additional information.